When did you stop enjoying Spider-Man comics?

[Kaitou D. Kid]

That's not how Moore meant it. Moore was looking at it from a creative and aesthetic perspective not in terms of continuity-stuff or an idea of the right age for the character which he doesn't care for at all. Moore is generally speaking not a fan of Spider-Man and the Ditko he prefers is the creator of Dr. Strange and the one who created horror comics for Warren Comics. Moore has said multiple times that Ditko's best work is the horror comics he did for Warren (under editor/writer Archie Goodwin) right after he quit Marvel, and just before he went full objectivist.

The only other time Moore has referred to Spider-Man is a 1982 essay on Stan Lee called "Blinded by the Hype" in which he refers to what he sees as the decay of Marvel Comics, and his views make it clear what his attitude to Spider-Man aging would be: "The worst thing was that everything had ground to a halt. The books had stopped developing. If you take a look at a current Spider-Man comic, you’ll find that he’s maybe twenty years old, he worries a lot about whats right and what’s wrong, and he has a lot of trouble with his girlfriends. Do you know what Spider-Man was doing fifteen years ago? Well, he was about nineteen years old, he worried a lot about what was right and what was wrong and he had a lot of trouble with his girlfriends." (https://kirbymuseum.org/blogs/dynami...an-lee*******/)

So Moore is not at all on the side of keeping characters stagnant or refusing to have them age-up. The issue of Spider-Man comics being at a peak in Ditko's term is an aesthetic one, i.e. in terms of artistic quality. In the same way people say that the best Donald Duck comics are by Carl Barks (though some argue that Don Rosa is great too). But that's not the same as arguing as that somehow keeping comics exactly the way it was in Barks' run is all we should be doing.

The Ditko run of Spider-Man is always going to be fascinating in that you can see the book emerging and shaping before your eyes and every single development and advance in Spider-Man (including the marriage) was basically prefigured and foreshadowed (albeit unintentionally) in Ditko's run. So to me saying that "only Ditko" implies "only high school Spider-Man" is a false dichotomy and one that cedes vital real estate (wrongfully) to the opposing camp, when in fact those in favor of Spider-Man growing and changing have a stronger and deeper, and provably righteous claim, to Ditko than the high-schoolers.

Maybe I shouldn't have singled out Moore without more context, but I was generally referring to that sort of opinion. I wouldn't say it's common, but I see it come up and be alluded to from time to time, even from some high-profile writers*, so I figured it's a good idea to discuss it.

*Grant Morrison for example has alluded to it before:

According to the webchat Morrison gave at Next Planet Over in 1999, the story was to begin with an attack by Mysterio, resulting in Spider-Man waking in a parallel world where Aunt May died and Peter never married.

"The Spider-Man of that world is a creepy, skinny Ditko guy, who lives on his own and is shunned by the neighbors." said Morrison, "He only comes alive when he's out on the rooftops leaping about and squirting jets of white stuff over everything. Freud would have loved the story as the creepy but ultimately decent Spider-Man meets his counterpart from a place where Peter married a supermodel and made lots of money. The story was based around that tension and the ultimate redemption of the creepy Ditko character. I'd do something different now."

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Maybe I shouldn't have singled out Moore without more context, but I was generally referring to that sort of opinion.

Nah, I get it. It's cool as always with you, Kaitou.

Alan Moore has never been against the idea of characters aging or growing up and changing. Quite the opposite. At least back when he still gave a damn about superhero stories.

I wouldn't say it's common, but I see it come up and be alluded to from time to time, even from some high-profile writers*, so I figured it's a good idea to discuss it.

*Grant Morrison for example has alluded to it before:

Morrison is the person who made Cyclops cheat on Jean Grey with Emma Frost (granted Cyclops walked out on his wife Madelyne to be with Jean, so it's in canon for him to be unfaithful) and had them make out on Jean's grave...so it's not a surprise that they have a weird and off-kilter attitude to heterosexual romance and marriage. Morrison remember was one of the co-authors (along with Millar and Mark Waid) of the Superman 2000 Proposal that was ultimately hijacked for OMD (though they said that Mark Waid was the most militant about ending the marriage):
https://sites.google.com/site/deepsp...-2000-proposal

I think Morrison's interpretation overemphasizes the weirdness and creepiness of Ditko's Peter and favors symbolism (i.e. the Freudian stuff) over storytelling. It's also a kind of projection because Ditko apparently being a creep (which many people reflexively assume) meant that Spider-Man had to be a creep, when again the character Ditko more personally put himself in is Doctor Strange (a dude who never leaves his house for the most part, spends his time with books and charts the boundaries of his imagination making Strange a kind of artist-figure) to the point that he gave Stephen Strange his first name (Stephen John Ditko). It's only because Spider-Man was the biggest success in Ditko's career that people fixate so much on that but that's not to assume that Ditko put more of himself in Spidey.**

Others point out that Ditko's run isn't all that weird (my emphasis)
--- "Even back before Gwen and MJ, he had two bombshells doing some 60s-females-in-comics-weeping over not being able to win his heart in the form of Liz Allen and Betty Brant, with Ms. Watson’s niece perpetually waiting in the wings—known by readers to be gorgeous almost beyond words as far back as Amazing #25...and his late-night adventuring hardly seemed to get in the way of the studies that would net him a full scholarship to ESU...By the standards of the other costumed adventurers of the time his experiences were certainly unorthodox (which was, of course, the point), but from any objective standpoint the boy was leading a charmed life...But that's not something that can last. It was never really meant to last. There’s an endpoint to the story of Peter Parker, Teenage Superhero, by a team no less official than Stan Lee and Steve Ditko...He’s no longer Spider-Man, the Teenage Superhero, but Spider-Man the young adult...He’s about growing...the desire to reduce Spider-Man to an easily—repeatable equation...would be twisted into Loss and the Soap Opera dynamics..."
-- David Mann, [http://sequart.org/magazine/42314/sp...ser%E2%80%9D/]

Likewise, Paul Jenkins (who was Alan Moore's editor and collaborator before becoming a writer in his own right) is also British from that generation and he likes a grown-up and married Spider-Man.


** Ditko across his career had good commercial instincts and was quite aware that his personal predilections wouldn't always be commercial. Like for instance after creating Mr. A who was outright objectivist propaganda, he created The Question who was only subtextually objectivist but otherwise could work as a traditional vigilante sleuth-hero, and as such Question found some crossover success that Mr. A didn't. So with Spider-Man, Ditko was essentially working to create a mainstream superhero success while Doctor Stange allowed him to let his hair down (figuratively speaking).

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I think Morrison's interpretation overemphasizes the weirdness and creepiness of Ditko's Peter and favors symbolism (i.e. the Freudian stuff) over storytelling. It's also a kind of projection because Ditko apparently being a creep (which many people reflexively assume) meant that Spider-Man had to be a creep, when again the character Ditko more personally put himself in is Doctor Strange (a dude who never leaves his house for the most part, spends his time with books and charts the boundaries of his imagination making Strange a kind of artist-figure) to the point that he gave Stephen Strange his first name (Stephen John Ditko). It's only because Spider-Man was the biggest success in Ditko's career that people fixate so much on that but that's not to assume that Ditko put more of himself in Spidey.**

Others point out that Ditko's run isn't all that weird (my emphasis)
--- "Even back before Gwen and MJ, he had two bombshells doing some 60s-females-in-comics-weeping over not being able to win his heart in the form of Liz Allen and Betty Brant, with Ms. Watson’s niece perpetually waiting in the wings—known by readers to be gorgeous almost beyond words as far back as Amazing #25...and his late-night adventuring hardly seemed to get in the way of the studies that would net him a full scholarship to ESU...By the standards of the other costumed adventurers of the time his experiences were certainly unorthodox (which was, of course, the point), but from any objective standpoint the boy was leading a charmed life...But that's not something that can last. It was never really meant to last. There’s an endpoint to the story of Peter Parker, Teenage Superhero, by a team no less official than Stan Lee and Steve Ditko...He’s no longer Spider-Man, the Teenage Superhero, but Spider-Man the young adult...He’s about growing...the desire to reduce Spider-Man to an easily—repeatable equation...would be twisted into Loss and the Soap Opera dynamics..."
-- David Mann, [http://sequart.org/magazine/42314/sp...ser%E2%80%9D/]

This is more-or-less my view too. I think the other problem with Morrison's interpretation is that he is taking a lot of the awkwardness or "creepiness" of Ditko's Peter out of context. I mean, of course that an 18-year old kid (who is technically still a teenager, even if he can legally vote) who just started college and making friends would still be a little awkward like that. It's not at all uncommon for a lot of people to start off reserved in high school, begin to outgrow that in college, and fully outgrow that by their 20s. The personality characteristics that Morrison would attribute to the adult writer (whatever amount of it actually exists and isn't just being projected onto Peter), I would attribute a lot more to the age and to where the character was in life at that time. Something akin to the Lee/Romita Peter, and eventually the JMS Peter, would have still very likely happened had Ditko stayed on longer, and for obvious reasons (this thread already talked about all the setups that Ditko left for Romita so I won't be redundant).

[Zelena]

Nothing in particular… He is still a very sympathethic character… the most sympathetic of all comic characters.

The passage of time, I suppose.

[deadboy80]

Loved the clone saga. Once they killed Ben, and restored Peter it was just about over for me. I figured they easily could have supported both. After that and the death of baby May, I just lost interest. I've picked up some issues hear and their.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

This is more-or-less my view too. I think the other problem with Morrison's interpretation is that he is taking a lot of the awkwardness or "creepiness" of Ditko's Peter out of context. I mean, of course that an 18-year old kid (who is technically still a teenager, even if he can legally vote) who just started college and making friends would still be a little awkward like that. It's not at all uncommon for a lot of people to start off reserved in high school, begin to outgrow that in college, and fully outgrow that by their 20s. The personality characteristics that Morrison would attribute to the adult writer (whatever amount of it actually exists and isn't just being projected onto Peter), I would attribute a lot more to the age and to where the character was in life at that time. Something akin to the Lee/Romita Peter, and eventually the JMS Peter, would have still very likely happened had Ditko stayed on longer, and for obvious reasons (this thread already talked about all the setups that Ditko left for Romita so I won't be redundant).

You are right.

Morrison is a smart writer and a great talent, but that doesn't mean they're always right. Even Alan Moore isn't always right (he's still right 97% of the time).

Moore for instance doesn't like Secret Wars 1984, I actually think it's one of the greatest comics of the 1980s, and a representation of the wildness and creativity of comics as entertainment. And there's a place for that. This was a comic that inspired hip hop artists like MF DOOM (rest in peace) to build an entire gimmick based on how Doom was portrayed there. Moore also tended to deprecate Chris Claremont in his early interviews but he was by far a more defining comics writer of that period than even Moore was, and someone whose fandom includes a lot of people across pop culture and experimental avant-garde fields like the French director Olivier Assayas (https://www.darkhorizons.com/olivier...perhero-films/).

[Hulkout42]

When Slott took over basically, made me drop the book actually and that was something i never thought i would ever do...thank god Spencer made me come back.

[captchuck]

Spider-Man is one of the greatest characters in comic book history. Generally, Marvel got it right. I didn't want to see him lose an eye and thought that was out of place in a Spidey comic, but generally, it's been an enjoyable read. When a long term series goes off on a tangent, things can get more interesting for a while.

[Vworp Vworp]

I was out before the end of OMD.

OMIT subsequently salted the earth and Slott paved it over with concrete.

I have had the occasional look see at what Robinson's been up to (generally prompted by the same old deal baiting we've been seeing since 2007). But although it's better than Slott's stuff, it's still a comic book about an alternate Spidey who took over the real Spidey's life nearly 15 years ago.

So it's not for me Jen.

[marhawkman]

I was out before the end of OMD.

OMIT subsequently salted the earth and Slott paved it over with concrete.

I have had the occasional look see at what Robinson's been up to (generally prompted by the same old deal baiting we've been seeing since 2007). But although it's better than Slott's stuff, it's still a comic book about an alternate Spidey who took over the real Spidey's life nearly 15 years ago.

So it's not for me Jen.

I actually like the idea of Superior Spider-man. Otto as a less villainous character is a great idea IMO.

The magic continuity re-writes were off the wall BS both in and out of universe. To me the best Spider-Man... was in Spider-Man TAS when he was happily married. The ending of that was tragic(it was a clone of MJ and the clone died), but it wasn't ridiculous. Also it didn't erase the idea of Pete wanting to have that sort of life. Madame Webb asked him to help her fight an inter-dimensional war and he jumped at it because Webb promised to help him find MJ afterwards! Granted that was the ending, but the idea was there that Pete was going to find MJ and go back to happily living with her. I do wonder what she would have said looking at the wedding photos though.

Oh yeah, that reminds me... Spider-Man: TAS was early college Pete. Which had a lot of opportunities for mad science hi-jinks that just don't make sense for high-school.

Oh and MC2 had future Pete and Future MJ and their 2.5 kids. (I say .5 because April is... complicated)

[Jman27]

I actually like the idea of Superior Spider-man. Otto as a less villainous character is a great idea IMO.

The magic continuity re-writes were off the wall BS both in and out of universe. To me the best Spider-Man... was in Spider-Man TAS when he was happily married. The ending of that was tragic(it was a clone of MJ and the clone died), but it wasn't ridiculous. Also it didn't erase the idea of Pete wanting to have that sort of life. Madame Webb asked him to help her fight an inter-dimensional war and he jumped at it because Webb promised to help him find MJ afterwards! Granted that was the ending, but the idea was there that Pete was going to find MJ and go back to happily living with her. I do wonder what she would have said looking at the wedding photos though.

Oh yeah, that reminds me... Spider-Man: TAS was early college Pete. Which had a lot of opportunities for mad science hi-jinks that just don't make sense for high-school.

Oh and MC2 had future Pete and Future MJ and their 2.5 kids. (I say .5 because April is... complicated)

i remember watching that episode when I was younger and I kept questioning like how could he not know he married water and then the next question I had was how is he going to explain that to the annoying aunt. then another question came up and it was so when does find the real MJ does she still stay marry to him or do they "divorce" like she could have had a whole new life when she fell thru that portal. And even now I still dont like that reveal leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

[PCN24454]

i remember watching that episode when I was younger and I kept questioning like how could he not know he married water and then the next question I had was how is he going to explain that to the annoying aunt. then another question came up and it was so when does find the real MJ does she still stay marry to him or do they "divorce" like she could have had a whole new life when she fell thru that portal. And even now I still dont like that reveal leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

That honestly just felt trivial in the grand scheme of things to me. All he needs to do is find the real MJ. She feels the same way as the clone did.

[marhawkman]

i remember watching that episode when I was younger and I kept questioning like how could he not know he married water and then the next question I had was how is he going to explain that to the annoying aunt. then another question came up and it was so when does find the real MJ does she still stay marry to him or do they "divorce" like she could have had a whole new life when she fell thru that portal. And even now I still don't like that reveal leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

Yeah, the clone of MJ loved Peter because the real MJ did. This wasn't really a surprise to Pete.

As for: "what now?" Well the clone filled out the paperwork using the identity of the real MJ. So it's up to MJ whether she wants to reveal to the world at large that there was a clone of her running around or maybe just quietly take over the life her clone was living.

[exile001]

I'm pretty patient but had to quit during the Byrne/Mackie era and BND.

Both eras highlighted all the things I dislike in Spider-man - Peter Parker the loser.

It's often brought up that Peter is the 'ordinary guy' hero as he is (or was) more grounded than most. From this, some writers seem to take a very myopic view of the very early years (because it's always an attempt to return/relive that glory) as Peter Parker: life's punching bag.

However, this was never really the case as while Peter had many hardships in the early days it was always balanced with positives (even if Peter couldn't recognise them). There was always a girl, Aunt May always got better, there was always a challenge overcome, there was always a win. Sure, things could get a little bleak for an issue or two but it didn't last.

Also, Peter was a child.

But during the Byrne/Mackie and BND eras Peter was knocked down then kicked repeatedly to the point that reading the book was unpleasant, no fun and Peter himself was just miserable. Who wants to read about a hero who hates his life perpetually for two-three years?

I've since read both eras in trade and still consider them mostly garbage. Credit where it is due - Jenkins coming aboard was better (but his run after was much more fun) and I love Spidey's rogues so a lot of Gauntlet was fun. Not so much Lizard eating his son.

[JBatmanFan05]

I lost my love for Spider-Man after OMD. Before that arc, the book was incredible and Spider-Man was my favorite character. There was so much growth and it felt like the events happening in the book were one series of organically occurring events. I still think Spider-Man is the greatest superhero, but he's no longer my favorite. OMD took a lot away from what was happening with Pete.

Yeah, OMD/BND was the end for me. I've always been more a DC guy I should say, but I was a serious Spidey fan and reader growing up as well, and OMD/BND just broke it all. And I'm a rare person who both thinks that 1) Marvel's publicity stunt 1987 marriage for Peter was ill conceived in every sense/execution, and yet 2) you just can't Mephisto-out the marriage for a character like Spider-Man.

I do custom comic binding, and about 2 years ago I think I came to the unprecedented tentative conclusion that I will end my collection of Spider-Man forever with a custom set of 3 volumes that will end with a heavily-abridged version of the 90's Clone Saga (roughly 15 issues along with custom made text/image gap-filling pages) and then really end with Hobgoblin Lives (a story I have always loved properly ending a mystery I always loved). So I will have all my Omnibuses/Masterworks, and then end it all with my custom 3 volumes covering the black costume, the original end of the Kingsley/Leeds Hobgoblin saga, Venom, Carnage, Maximum Carnage, Kraven's Last Hunt, the marriage, and other great tales in and around that time. I will use the Epic Collections largely to make these custom volumes (which are mostly completely designed already).