Who was a better Spider-Man writer: Dan Slott or Nick Spencer?

[Mister Mets]

This came up in another thread, and we may have enough distance to ask this question.

Who is the better Spider-Man writer: Dan Slott or Nick Spencer?

I wonder if the ways in which the question is phrased might lead to different answers. Will someone think Slott is the better Spider-Man writer, but they enjoyed Spencer more? That kind of stuff probably won't make a difference for most.

[Kevinroc]

Spencer. He had a much better take on Peter that felt more in line with his established personality.

[Username taken]

Spencer.

Slott wasn't bad initially but he kind of veered off course after a while.

[Batman Begins 2005]

Nick Spencer was more consistent. Better characterization in Peter Parker, Mary Jane Watson and Felicia Hardy.

Hated TASM (Vol. 3) and TASM (Vol. 4) which made me drop the book. Dan Slott should have gone after TSSM and everything after tainted his tenure with the exception of Renew Your Vows.

[Matt Rat]

Slott would have been a better Spider-Man editor than a writer.

Spencer brought me back to the book for the first time since 2007, and wrote some of the best 'fix fics' I've seen in a comic since Grant Morrison on Batman.

[Lukmendes]

Slott would have been a better Spider-Man editor than a writer.

Makes me wonder if he'd be kinda like Jim Shooter as an editor lol.

Shooter as an editor brought a huge perk of the continuity being pretty good among the comics, but done so in a way that the continuity isn't suffocating the stories, however, as a writer he, was hit and miss, and his misses could bring some really big garbage, with Avengers#200 being the peak example.

[Mister Mets]

I'll go with Slott.

He wrote more of my favorite stories, and his best was just better for me than Spencer's best.

There was no part of his run that frustrated me as much as the twenty issue fight with the Sin-Eater and Kindred, or the rushed finale, where the main defense seems to be that other people messed up.

[PCN24454]

It felt like nothing really happened in Spencer’s run, so I’ll go with Slott.

[Kevinroc]

I'll go with Slott.

He wrote more of my favorite stories, and his best was just better for me than Spencer's best.

There was no part of his run that frustrated me as much as the twenty issue fight with the Sin-Eater and Kindred, or the rushed finale, where the main defense seems to be that other people messed up.

A lot of people hated Black Cat's turn as Queenpin.

[TinkerSpider]

No contest. Especially since the poll is "Who is a better writer," not "Who did you like more."

Spencer. Spencer is by far the superior writer.

Spencer understands characterization, pacing, dialogue and how to tell a story in a visual medium. Yes, pacing - I fully put all the issues with the Kindred story on Nick Lowe and upper Marvel editorial. His earlier issues were very well paced - take his opening story about the split between Peter and Spider-Man. Spencer also deftly used themes and subtexts. (And a lot happened in Spencer's run. I mean, he retconned Sins Past! He gave Mephisto another reason for OMD! He gave MJ her acting career back! He deepened Mysterio's characterization! Etc. etc. etc.)

Slott couldn't write his way out of a paper bag unless a deus ex machina came completely out of the blue and showed him how. Slott wrote as if subtext was a special on the menu at Subway and theme is the music you hear at the start of an old TV show. His dialogue was painful, his stories contrived (Peter jumping off a satellite in space and pinpointing his landing in Paris - gimme a thousand breaks). He can't write female characters, period.

Spencer told stories that flowed organically out of Peter's established characterization and deftly (except for aforementioned editorial heavyhandiness) wove in and out of continuity.

Slott basically played with action figures and narrated their actions ("And now: Peter puts on a helmet given to him by Doc Ock because....I can make him do it because I control the action figure! Mwa-ha-ha! Oh, look, I can swap Doc Ock's head with Peter's! Wheeee!"). There was no such as consistent characterization. Peter, MJ, Aunt May, Ock, whoever - they acted however Slott needed to have them act so he could arrange his playset the way he wanted.

TL; dr: Spencer is a writer.

Slott should be at Hasbro or LEGO.

[PanicPixieDreamGirl]

I'm sure both have their pros and cons as writers. I'm gonna sit this one out. (I mean, obviously I'm not, but there ya go.)

[Chubistian]

Dan Slott. He has many stories that I love going back to: New Ways To Die, No One Dies, Superior Spider-Man, Go Down Swinging, etcetera.

Nick Spencer dropped the ball imo, I don't know who much to blame on him and how much on editorial, but it was a poor run with some fun stories. His Superior Foes of Spider-Man is spectacular, though.

As for Peter's voice, I think they write a pretty close character. I laughed and got excited reading both

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Neither of them have been exceptional, but Spencer has been great at his best (Green Goblin Returns + the first 12 issues) and meh at his worst. That's not even accounting for the fact he probably wanted to undo OMD. With free reign, he could have probably done even more.

Slott is exactly the opposite. His run is not only the most anti-Spidey in Spider-Man history (to borrow his language), but with more free reign he could have done even more damage. In Slott's utopia, MJ would be gone, Peter is a forever manchild, and Parker Industries would be here to stay. The one thing from Slott's run that even resembles Spider-Man is Renew Your Vows, and he was very likely forced to write that (contrary to his claim that he pushed "really hard" for it).

To me it's no contest that Spencer is the better writer, in spite of all the flaws.

A more even fight is if we compare Spencer's run with Spider-Man/Human Torch. That mini is genuinely good. Best thing Slott ever wrote with Spider-Man. But that was before OMD and isn't really part of his "run".

[Frontier]

I think it depends a lot on your own personal taste or sensibilities when it comes to the character.

Personally I think Spencer on a technical level is a much better writer than Slott, and whatever flaws I can cite in the second half of his run, I can at least say he wrote a more mature Peter, a more competent Spidey, a way better MJ and Black Cat, and a more normal Spider-Man vibe than Slott did.

I also have to give Spencer credit for actually genuinely wanting to write Spider-Man and not seeming to try to shift the character into the kind of title he would actually want to write and end up writing after the title ended (Iron Man and FF), and for not acting like he would rather write Doc Ock than Peter Parker.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I think it depends a lot on your own personal taste or sensibilities when it comes to the character.

Personally I think Spencer on a technical level is a much better writer than Slott, and whatever flaws I can cite in the second half of his run, I can at least say he wrote a more mature Peter, a more competent Spidey, a way better MJ and Black Cat, and a more normal Spider-Man vibe than Slott did.

I also have to give Spencer credit for actually genuinely wanting to write Spider-Man and not seeming to try to shift the character into the kind of title he would actually want to write and end up writing after the title ended (Iron Man and FF), and for not acting like he would rather write Doc Ock than Peter Parker.

This is a good summation. I share the same sentiment.