What stories just won't work for what characters

[DrNewGod]

You can make a lot of stories work for a lot of different kinds of characters, but there are some some combinations that don't work.

For example, you can make a story work about Spider-Man struggling with guilt because he made a choice for selfish reasons that had terrible consequences. That works for a whole lot of superheroes in the MU. It doesn't work for Captain America. He can make bad choices, sure, but for personal benefit? It's just doesn't fit the character. You can write the story, but it's like driving a car with square tires.

What are the stories that just don't fit with some characters?

[Alan2099]

I can't remember who, but I remember one writer talking about how you can put Spider-man anywhere and half the story is just how he reacts to the place. Asgard, the Svage Land, anything, but that's not something you can do with Punisher because he's not going to be phased by it and will just keep being the Punisher.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

You can never have Spider-Man in a story that deals with real oppression. I mean Spider-Man dealing with victims of rape, child abuse, death-by-cop and other issues. The minute you do that, you can no longer tell the story of Peter Parker and his pretend-fantasy-not-very-serious-or-consequential Parker Luck without him coming off as a sociopath. Spider-Man exists fundamentally in a very sanitized corner of New York, unlike Daredevil, Jessica Jones whose character and set-up exists to deal with issues of real oppression, to say nothing of X-Men which deals with this side of life even more so.

[DrNewGod]

You can never have Spider-Man in a story that deals with real oppression. I mean Spider-Man dealing with victims of rape, child abuse, death-by-cop and other issues. The minute you do that, you can no longer tell the story of Peter Parker and his pretend-fantasy-not-very-serious-or-consequential Parker Luck without him coming off as a sociopath. Spider-Man exists fundamentally in a very sanitized corner of New York, unlike Daredevil, Jessica Jones whose character and set-up exists to deal with issues of real oppression, to say nothing of X-Men which deals with this side of life even more so.

That is way more insightful and intense than anything that occurred to me in proposing this thread. I bow Revolutionary_Jack.

[Huntsman Spider]

You can never have Spider-Man in a story that deals with real oppression. I mean Spider-Man dealing with victims of rape, child abuse, death-by-cop and other issues. The minute you do that, you can no longer tell the story of Peter Parker and his pretend-fantasy-not-very-serious-or-consequential Parker Luck without him coming off as a sociopath. Spider-Man exists fundamentally in a very sanitized corner of New York, unlike Daredevil, Jessica Jones whose character and set-up exists to deal with issues of real oppression, to say nothing of X-Men which deals with this side of life even more so.

Come to think of it, some writers did actually try to do that, albeit in a roundabout way. There was a PSA (public service announcement) comic with Spider-Man and the Power Pack back in the 1980s where Spidey himself confessed that he was a survivor of childhood sexual abuse from an older "friend" he'd made when he was a young kid, though that might not be canon. In the same decade, the Sin-Eater story was, at its core, about a cop-turned-serial killer targeting those members of society he thought "coddled criminals," and the worst part was that he used to be one of Spider-Man's few law enforcement allies, and had killed Captain Jean DeWolff, another one of those few allies, in her bed while she slept, which was the inciting incident for that arc. Later on, in the 2000s, the Spider-Man/Black Cat miniseries by Kevin Smith tackled rape and sexual assault and revealed near the end that Black Cat herself was a rape survivor. (I wouldn't necessarily argue it was done all that well, but points for at least trying.)

Also in that particular decade, at the beginning of the JMS Amazing Spider-Man run, Peter was convinced to become a teacher at Midtown High after foiling a would-be school shooter who, as it turned out, just wanted his bullies to stop constantly tormenting him and during his time as a teacher, he found out one of his students was homeless, which led to him fighting a superpowered criminal who used his abilities to exploit homeless people. More recently or contemporarily, his guest spot in Chip Zdarsky's Daredevil had him make the argument to a cop who'd been dogging Daredevil since DD accidentally killed a criminal that as long as the likes of the Kingpin could still pass for a respectable citizen, i.e. "Mayor Fisk," "law and order" might as well be an unfunny joke. (Again, not saying it'd necessarily been done that well, but still, points to them for trying.)

[Steel Inquisitor]

You can never have Spider-Man in a story that deals with real oppression. I mean Spider-Man dealing with victims of rape, child abuse, death-by-cop and other issues. The minute you do that, you can no longer tell the story of Peter Parker and his pretend-fantasy-not-very-serious-or-consequential Parker Luck without him coming off as a sociopath. Spider-Man exists fundamentally in a very sanitized corner of New York, unlike Daredevil, Jessica Jones whose character and set-up exists to deal with issues of real oppression, to say nothing of X-Men which deals with this side of life even more so.

Hard disagree. Peter's just the protagonist and a stand-in for the audience who don't experience that oppression, he's able to be the lens to examine something like oppression and show why Peter should be concerned about those issues. Which he would be. What peter faces in his life isn't true oppression but it's not like he's not capable of having troubles in his, life which will do things like make him homeless, or care for relatives who are vulnerable to everything that happens when people get old: stroke, heart attack, being taken advantage of by retirement homes, insurance issues and so on. Everyone can be sympathetic with these subjects since they're used to living pay check to pay check, having relationship troubles and have elderly relatives. Daredevil is more realistic with its tone, but it makes no sense to think Parker and Murdock don't share many things. Murdock isn't even truly "blind" in the real world sense, has been New York City's DA, has a dating life that straight men would kill to have (just like Parker) and is a fantasy ninja like Batman.

[JudicatorPrime]

Thor as an X-Man. Would never work. Then again, if Odin ever wanted to teach his son humility, forcing him to live as an oppressed, persecuted minority might not be a bad place to start. Especially if his mutation left him disfigured or with physical abnormalities.

Ben Grimm as the Scarlet Witch. Would never work. I can already see it: "No more rocks." The end of civilization as we know it.

Cardi B as Marvel's First Female. Not a chance. Way too much ... everything ... for a standard Kree uniform.

Nightcrawler as Peter Parker. And you thought J. Jonah Jameson hating Spider-Man was bad. Imagine if the Daily Bugle had been flooding its readership with headlines and editorials about a daemonic mutant menace for the past few decades.

[Agent Z]

Come to think of it, some writers did actually try to do that, albeit in a roundabout way. There was a PSA (public service announcement) comic with Spider-Man and the Power Pack back in the 1980s where Spidey himself confessed that he was a survivor of childhood sexual abuse from an older "friend" he'd made when he was a young kid, though that might not be canon. In the same decade, the Sin-Eater story was, at its core, about a cop-turned-serial killer targeting those members of society he thought "coddled criminals," and the worst part was that he used to be one of Spider-Man's few law enforcement allies, and had killed Captain Jean DeWolff, another one of those few allies, in her bed while she slept, which was the inciting incident for that arc. Later on, in the 2000s, the Spider-Man/Black Cat miniseries by Kevin Smith tackled rape and sexual assault and revealed near the end that Black Cat herself was a rape survivor. (I wouldn't necessarily argue it was done all that well, but points for at least trying.)

Also in that particular decade, at the beginning of the JMS Amazing Spider-Man run, Peter was convinced to become a teacher at Midtown High after foiling a would-be school shooter who, as it turned out, just wanted his bullies to stop constantly tormenting him and during his time as a teacher, he found out one of his students was homeless, which led to him fighting a superpowered criminal who used his abilities to exploit homeless people. More recently or contemporarily, his guest spot in Chip Zdarsky's Daredevil had him make the argument to a cop who'd been dogging Daredevil since DD accidentally killed a criminal that as long as the likes of the Kingpin could still pass for a respectable citizen, i.e. "Mayor Fisk," "law and order" might as well be an unfunny joke. (Again, not saying it'd necessarily been done that well, but still, points to them for trying.)

Evil That Men Do could have been taken more seriously as a rape story if not for the sexualized art of Felicia. To the story's credit, it's one of the few Big 2 stories that acknowledges male victims of rape with the seriousness they deserve.

[Ferro]

Thor as an X-Man. Would never work. Then again, if Odin ever wanted to teach his son humility, forcing him to live as an oppressed, persecuted minority might not be a bad place to start. Especially if his mutation left him disfigured or with physical abnormalities.

Ben Grimm as the Scarlet Witch. Would never work. I can already see it: "No more rocks." The end of civilization as we know it.

Cardi B as Marvel's First Female. Not a chance. Way too much ... everything ... for a standard Kree uniform.

Nightcrawler as Peter Parker. And you thought J. Jonah Jameson hating Spider-Man was bad. Imagine if the Daily Bugle had been flooding its readership with headlines and editorials about a daemonic mutant menace for the past few decades.

this is like, a never ending ride trough layers of confusion into clarity into excitment, finishing into a pure nirvanna that opens my third eye.
bravo

[Riv86672]

I can't remember who, but I remember one writer talking about how you can put Spider-man anywhere and half the story is just how he reacts to the place. Asgard, the Svage Land, anything, but that's not something you can do with Punisher because he's not going to be phased by it and will just keep being the Punisher.

That’s what makes Spidey so special. Despite his powers he’s an Everyman (hence the “friendly neighborhood”).

[Revolutionary_Jack]

That is way more insightful and intense than anything that occurred to me in proposing this thread. I bow Revolutionary_Jack.

Thanks. If you look hard at any character or story you can always find the outlines of the background, the assumptions and so on, that makes the character work. Like in the case of The Punisher, look up something called "the last Punisher story".

Come to think of it, some writers did actually try to do that, albeit in a roundabout way. There was a PSA (public service announcement) comic with Spider-Man and the Power Pack back in the 1980s where Spidey himself confessed that he was a survivor of childhood sexual abuse from an older "friend" he'd made when he was a young kid, though that might not be canon. In the same decade, the Sin-Eater story was, at its core, about a cop-turned-serial killer targeting those members of society he thought "coddled criminals," and the worst part was that he used to be one of Spider-Man's few law enforcement allies, and had killed Captain Jean DeWolff, another one of those few allies, in her bed while she slept, which was the inciting incident for that arc.

Those are good examples yes. But Peter Parker wanting vengeance and justice for murder as in The Death of Captain DeWolff, isn't so far outside the usual story. It's just that the violence is more realistically treated. Murder victims in real life are likely to die and their bodies discovered like DeWolff as opposed to you know death by being rammed off the top of the bridge by a Goblin on a Glider. So that gives it an earthier emphasis as opposed to how Death is usually dealt by supervillains.

Later on, in the 2000s, the Spider-Man/Black Cat miniseries by Kevin Smith tackled rape and sexual assault and revealed near the end that Black Cat herself was a rape survivor. (I wouldn't necessarily argue it was done all that well, but points for at least trying.)

When has that backstory ever been discussed or addressed since then? Or brought up to Peter Parker himself. Think of how it would affect every issue after that, if Peter were to learn that his former girlfriend and one of his closest friends was a rape survivor. Every issue after that, when Peter starts whining about his life...you as a reader are waiting for him to think, "well I shouldn't complain, Felicia was the one with real issues".

Also in that particular decade, at the beginning of the JMS Amazing Spider-Man run, Peter was convinced to become a teacher at Midtown High after foiling a would-be school shooter who, as it turned out, just wanted his bullies to stop constantly tormenting him and during his time as a teacher, he found out one of his students was homeless, which led to him fighting a superpowered criminal who used his abilities to exploit homeless people.

JMS' run had a more mature and grown-up, and altogether more admirable, version of Peter, that was since retconned out. I mean the time Peter spent as a high school teacher has, to my knowledge, never been addressed since then since editors (especially Tom Brevoort the Constantly Wrong) felt it made him too old.

What peter faces in his life isn't true oppression

This happens to be my point.

...but it's not like he's not capable of having troubles in his, life which will do things like make him homeless,

But Peter will never get so poor that he will be chased out of New York City like so many people in real life have been because of rising rent costs. Spider-Man and New York are too central to each other to remove one from another. So as a reader you know that whatever rent issues Peter has and so on, he's never actually going to face consequences for that. He's never going to actually be homeless, he's never going to leave the city.

In other words, you can't do a Spider-Man story that deals with real oppression and hardship, and still have Peter Parker and Spider-Man be the same character after that.

Daredevil is more realistic with its tone, but it makes no sense to think Parker and Murdock don't share many things. Murdock isn't even truly "blind" in the real world sense, has been New York City's DA, has a dating life that straight men would kill to have (just like Parker) and is a fantasy ninja like Batman.

Daredevil also has plenty of dead girlfriends while Peter has just the one. There's a reason that writers/editors always paused about killing Mary Jane. For one thing, Gwen died because she was quite unpopular while MJ wasn't. The other issue though is that after Peter failed to save Gwen, he can't fail to save his other love interest because it would make him too much of a failure to start spinning stories out of him. You saw this in the late 90s where they briefly killed MJ in a "plane crash" (where they never found the body...i.e. code for she's totes alive) and the stories after that were really depressive and it sunk sales to real lows.

[Steel Inquisitor]

When has that backstory ever been discussed or addressed since then? Or brought up to Peter Parker himself. Think of how it would affect every issue after that, if Peter were to learn that his former girlfriend and one of his closest friends was a rape survivor. Every issue after that, when Peter starts whining about his life...you as a reader are waiting for him to think, "well I shouldn't complain, Felicia was the one with real issues".

I agree that should have coloured more interactions between them, however, Peter has numerous things to complain about. He's been framed for murder, he nearly went insane over what the Clone Saga did to his identity, numerous friends have tried to murder and betray him, and so on. In the fictional stories the unnatural events may be more unrealistic to us but they have very real consequences to the characters who are experiencing it.

This happens to be my point.

Your point was more intricate than that, as it stipulates he's suffered no real loss when that's not true and that those subjects shouldn't be addressed in his own comics.

But Peter will never get so poor that he will be chased out of New York City like so many people in real life have been because of rising rent costs. Spider-Man and New York are too central to each other to remove one from another. So as a reader you know that whatever rent issues Peter has and so on, he's never actually going to face consequences for that. He's never going to actually be homeless, he's never going to leave the city.

And Daredevil will? Being homeless is a nightmare most people try to stay ahead of, and this has been a Sword of Damocles over his head for long periods because he's human. He's affected by rising rent costs just like everyone else. Being homeless anywhere is a horrific experience that nobody should have to live through, the location doesn't matter to "hardship: or being oppressed. There's plenty of oppression in New York City as it is. You could say that for most fictional protagonists but that risk still impacts their lives.

Its not like he's hasn't struggled over the years, he's a super-hero. Did you read the Clone Saga?

In other words, you can't do a Spider-Man story that deals with real oppression and hardship, and still have Peter Parker and Spider-Man be the same character after that.

Peter's been buried alive, he knows what hardship is. He's seen Carnage rip people apart in front of him. That's more about the medium than Peter himself. Numerous characters should been far more mentally compromised from their experiences but we're supposed not supposed to acknowledge the true cost of that experience in every appearance they make. Scott Summers should be a nervous wreck by now, but he's not.

Daredevil also has plenty of dead girlfriends while Peter has just the one. There's a reason that writers/editors always paused about killing Mary Jane. For one thing, Gwen died because she was quite unpopular while MJ wasn't. The other issue though is that after Peter failed to save Gwen, he can't fail to save his other love interest because it would make him too much of a failure to start spinning stories out of him. You saw this in the late 90s where they briefly killed MJ in a "plane crash" (where they never found the body...i.e. code for she's totes alive) and the stories after that were really depressive and it sunk sales to real lows.

Having one should be enough, those sort of tragedies break people in the real world and her death has defined his life ever since. It's not a contest. What does that have anything to do with not being able to tell stories about oppression with him? Politics behind the scenes happens in all comic books.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I agree that should have coloured more interactions between them, however, Peter has numerous things to complain about. He's been framed for murder, he nearly went insane over what the Clone Saga did to his identity, numerous friends have tried to murder and betray him, and so on. In the fictional stories the unnatural events may be more unrealistic to us but they have very real consequences to the characters who are experiencing it.

Yeah, and those consequences the characters face are emotionally compelling, and remain so, as much for what they leave out, as what is left in.

At heart, Spider-Man is a comedy series. It can deal with some dark topics occassionally and so on, but never to a point where there's no coming back. It's always going to be a little remote. Think of all the things you see in Daredevil and Jessica Jones stories that you never see in Spider-Man titles. You don't have prostitutes for one thing. No strip clubs either. Like when Spider-Man got married, for a bachelor's party, Peter/Harry/Flash drank soda in an old cafe where they used to hang out with, because it wouldn't do for Peter Parker to be seen in that setting. It's always been a highly sanitized title and a highly sanitized story.

And Daredevil will?

Matt has spent time in San Francisco and other places, and besides his law practice is successful.

Did you read the Clone Saga?

You mean the event universally considered one of the worst stories ever, and whose events have never been addressed in the comics after that.

Your point was more intricate than that, as it stipulates he's suffered no real loss when that's not true and that those subjects shouldn't be addressed in his own comics.

I see why you get that idea. I wasn't criticizing the character and so on, or writing off his stories, but merely pointing out the operating assumptions that makes Spider-Man as an ongoing work.

Look far enough and you will find any character having that.
-- The Punisher, his stories can never deal with the consequences of reckless gun usage, such as the idea that a stray bullet accidentally kills a civilian. There's an editorial edict that forbids the "last Punisher story" where an innocent gets killed by accident by Castle and he has to quit being The Punisher and so on.
-- In the case of Fantastic Four, you can't have Reed Richards actually put his inventions on the market and transform the world. Likewise, you can't have Susan Storm divorce Reed even after she has had many grounds for doing so in terms of being a neglectful and condescending husband.
-- With Iron Man, you can't deal with the fact that being a capitalist superhero means that Tony Stark just surely benefitted from the tax cuts given by Reagan and Bush's administrations (and also 45's), or that his inventions either uses outsourced cheap labor in the Global South, or if he uses automation, put many workers out of jobs, or that for seeking markets for his products, he'd have to cut deals with dictatorial governments in China and look away from what those governments do. IF Tony Stark was a principled capitalist, he would not be so rich and successful. If he is rich and successful, he can't be a principled capitalist. So editors/writers can't actually tell any realistic story with being a businessman-superhero.

And of course, given that this is the Marvel Universe 616, you can never do a serious story dealing with nuclear power and radiation since in the Marvel comics' verse many characters get their powers from exposure to nuclear power and do not suffer what happened to real people who got exposure to radiation whether in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Chernobyl and so on.

[Alan2099]

At heart, Spider-Man is a comedy series. It can deal with some dark topics occassionally and so on, but never to a point where there's no coming back. It's always going to be a little remote.

That's just comics though.

To use Daredevil again as an example, his secret was outed, his girlfriend became a drug addict, he was homeless, beaten, and left for dead ... and a couple of writers later, he was cracking jokes again with a secret identity in place and his girlfriend (same girl) had become a popular radio DJ.

You mean the event universally considered one of the worst stories ever, and whose events have never been addressed in the comics after that.

It's been addressed a lot. Spider-man ran for over 100 issues and that was hugely tied into the clone saga.

-- The Punisher, his stories can never deal with the consequences of reckless gun usage, such as the idea that a stray bullet accidentally kills a civilian. There's an editorial edict that forbids the "last Punisher story" where an innocent gets killed by accident by Castle and he has to quit being The Punisher and so on.

The stray bullet thing has been addressed.

And of course, given that this is the Marvel Universe 616, you can never do a serious story dealing with nuclear power and radiation since in the Marvel comics' verse many characters get their powers from exposure to nuclear power and do not suffer what happened to real people who got exposure to radiation whether in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Chernobyl and so on.

There's been multiple stories addressing that over the years.

You seem to be hung up on the idea that realistic mean pessimistic. I don't know why you would even WANT stories where your heroes constantly fail and do horribly morally corrupt stuff. Then again, I don't know why the Ultimates was ever popular either.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

To use Daredevil again as an example, his secret was outed, his girlfriend became a drug addict, he was homeless, beaten, and left for dead ... and a couple of writers later, he was cracking jokes again with a secret identity in place and his girlfriend (same girl) had become a popular radio DJ.

Daredevil is in a constant cycle of renewed misery and self-flagellating abuse, and as a lawyer whose clientele includes people who suffer from violence and other hardships, you can always cycle in and cycle out a lot of bleak and edgy stuff in a serial narrative.

It's been addressed a lot. Spider-man ran for over 100 issues and that was hugely tied into the clone saga.

No it hasn't. Peter's missing baby or miscarriage has never been addressed in a serious way since the end of the clone saga.

The stray bullet thing has been addressed.

You mean The Punisher somehow always shoots in a geometrically precise way, in all times in all conditions even when using machine guns whose rate of fire is impossible for real world people to control? Yeah, that's not addressing the issue at all. That's part of the same dodge. The Punisher lives on the fantasy of perfect gun use which doesn't exist and never will.

You seem to be hung up on the idea that realistic mean pessimistic.

I don't know why pointing out that people in reality on exposure to radiation get tumors, cancers and other skin disorders is pessimistic. Do we tell small children that it's okay to stay underwater for a long time since they won't drown, are we being pessimistic and spoiling childhood innocence by telling them basic facts?

Pointing out that the stories of certain characters work as much for what's unsaid as for what is said on page isn't being pessimistic. It's merely point out the assumptions that make those stories work. If I say, exposure to radiation won't give you superpowers, or that Tony Stark would likely be poor and burning out the leftovers of his trust-fund if he decided to truly be a moral capitalist (i.e. his shareholders would buy him out, advertisers and contractors would sue him and so on) and that the entire concept of the character is a sham, I am merely telling readers to keep their fantasies and realities separate in the way that any kid is told by their parents not to stay underwater too long.

I don't know why you would even WANT stories where your heroes constantly fail and do horribly morally corrupt stuff.

Obviously Marvel Comics isn't Alan Moore so they aren't in the business of deconstruction or ending the genre altogether. So they have to somehow keep spinning the same set of assumptions even if they know and a lot of readers know that emperors have no clothes; so sometimes you have stories that address these assumptions here and there, point it out, or make self-aware jokes or references to it, but they do that nihilistically, i.e. in the cynical knowledge that they won't step out of these assumptions and expand and change the story in any tangible way.