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

[PCN24454]

This shouldn’t even be close, Nick had Spider-Man down to a tee before Lowe and his cronies stuck their noses into it.

Those early issues were pure Spider-Man at his best.

Slott wrote a man child moron.

Nothing happened in those early issues. They were literally all retreads of earlier stories. It made them redundant to read.

Only one I really liked was Lifetime Achievement, and even then, the reveal with Foswell at the end was incredibly cringey.

[Lukmendes]

AND NOW [rubs hands together] let's talk about how Spencer's retcon of Sins Past managed to be even more misogynistic than the original!

It removes Sins Past and AI Harry makes it clear Gwen's standards are too high for her to ever get dicked by Norman, I don't see how that's the case.

Also Spencer has had a lead for a while, wonder if Slott will catch up.

[Spiderfan001]

This shouldn’t even be close, Nick had Spider-Man down to a tee before Lowe and his cronies stuck their noses into it.

Those early issues were pure Spider-Man at his best.

Slott wrote a man child moron.

Co-signed

I, ah... Disagree. A lot. I suppose I can't think of anything else to say there except that schizophrenia is one of the most stigmatized disorders in the wonderful world of mental illness, and yeah I know it didn't really happen in the end but having a schizophrenic character (even if the comics never remember he's schizophrenic) jumping around yelling stuff about "hearing voices" while beating the crap out of the hero is just... A bad look. I think Spider-Man SHOULD be doing mental health awareness bs! Actually the Spider-Man writers should be doing all sorts of awareness bs, because they have a million-dollar multi-country platform, the sort of power none of us will ever have in a million years, and with great power... Nah I'm not going to say it.

As much as I agree w/ what you're saying, I feel all you care about in stories is awareness stuff.I don't think I've seen you talk about the story nearly as much as this stuff

AND NOW [rubs hands together] let's talk about how Spencer's retcon of Sins Past managed to be even more misogynistic than the original!

BRUH what?!Care to elaborate

It retcons that Gwen was a cheater and a liar and even AI Harry says she had better standards than to be w/ Norman specially when she was w/ someone else.Spencer also had an entire convo stating that Gwen wasn't a perfect angel in 616 and that she led her own life

[PanicPixieDreamGirl]

BRUH what?!Care to elaborate

It retcons that Gwen was a cheater and a liar and even AI Harry says she had better standards than to be w/ Norman specially when she was w/ someone else.Spencer also had an entire convo stating that Gwen wasn't a perfect angel in 616 and that she led her own life

I'm working on piece about this right now. (I already wrote one a year ago, but it needs an update.) But I suppose I should rephrase, on second thoughts it's equally as misogynistic as the original, but in a different way.

In the original Sins Past Gwen (a Gwen not dating Peter at the time) is young enough to be Norman's daughter, and she's just been through a bad experience when they uh, "encounter" each other. It's implied that Gwen falling into bed with Norman is the first time she's ever had sex with anyone. Norman does uh, quite obviously not use a condom.

Yes Gwen does not display particularly good judgement here, but it's not really her sin. It's Norman's. But the original Sins Past isn't really interested in Gwen's thoughts and agency, she's just a plot device to further Peter's misery, to paraphrase another thread here. A walking uterus. Also the concept of being pregnant with and then giving birth to a pair of super-powered super-aging babies you didn't ask for seems like full-on body horror to me, but hey.

Then Norman kills Gwen, thus retroactively making the original Death of Gwen Stacy story about a woman being punished for having sex outside marriage. (This is an old as time, and utterly fascinating, but still infuriating trope)

We then get almost two decades real-time of Gwen being, and this is not an insult, the Monica Lewinsky of Spider-Man fandom.

Now back to the present. The retcon of Sins Past still isn't interested in Gwen as a person. It doesn't remotely fix the issue, which wasn't "Gwen slept with Norman" but "Norman slept with a virgin young enough to be his daughter, knocked her up, and then murdered her." What the story is interested in is restoring Gwen as a pure virgin, and that's about it. It goes ridiculously over the top in doing this, if you ask me. The exact specifics of what Norman thought he did with Gwen are so goddamn convoluted and vague he's essentially off scott-free, but when it comes to Gwen... not only do we have to be reassured she was "too classy" for Norman, we also have Peter reassuring the twins that Gwen would have loved them as a mother when she was not, in fact, their mother. (Also classiness is not a shield that will protect someone from an abusive relationship, which is what the Gwen/Norman relationship as presented in Sins Past very much was.)

So essentially, Spencer's run devotes an awful lot of time and effort, none of which makes very much sense, to reassuring everyone that Gwen didn't in fact sleep with Norman and is a virgin again. If you were angry Gwen was "tainted" etc by sleeping with Norman (which was, to reiterate, not cheating on Peter) then yeah, the retcon is great. But it wasn't her who committed the Sin of the original story. It was Norman. Who murdered her and then told Peter, "What use is there in the paltry existence of one useless female?". That hasn't been retconned. Now he's Good and nice thanks to magic and we're supposed to feel sorry for him.




This has been, "Adventures in the Madonna-Whore Dichotomy"

[Lee]

This shouldn’t even be close, Nick had Spider-Man down to a tee before Lowe and his cronies stuck their noses into it.

Can you back up this rather mean-spirited claim? Nick Lowe was the editor throughout the entirety of Nick Spencer's run on Spider-Man, so when was the before and after? Who are these people you're referring to as cronies?

[Spiderfan001]

I'm working on piece about this right now. (I already wrote one a year ago, but it needs an update.) But I suppose I should rephrase, on second thoughts it's equally as misogynistic as the original, but in a different way.

You did say more at first, which made no sense to me but I myself dislike Sins Past a LOT for all these characters

In the original Sins Past Gwen (a Gwen not dating Peter at the time) is young enough to be Norman's daughter, and she's just been through a bad experience when they uh, "encounter" each other. It's implied that Gwen falling into bed with Norman is the first time she's ever had sex with anyone. Norman does uh, quite obviously not use a condom.

Yes Gwen does not display particularly good judgement here, but it's not really her sin. It's Norman's. But the original Sins Past isn't really interested in Gwen's thoughts and agency, she's just a plot device to further Peter's misery, to paraphrase another thread here. A walking uterus. Also the concept of being pregnant with and then giving birth to a pair of super-powered super-aging babies you didn't ask for seems like full-on body horror to me, but hey.

I, I don't think it's meant to be.

But I think it shows Gwen in a bad(and incorrect/OOC) light because she sleeps w/ Norman because of his "strength and magnetism".As if she's some weak and frail women who can't help herself when seeing a "strong" man. Also how she acts that Peter will accept him and the kids even though she's been lying to him all this time isn't a good look

Yeah, because JMS didn't pitch THIS story, he wanted Peter and Gwen to have kids which would have fleshed out their relationship in similar flashbacks and show her in a much more positive light

But I think this is in full Norman's Sin and Fault, as you also said.

Then Norman kills Gwen, thus retroactively making the original Death of Gwen Stacy story about a woman being punished for having sex outside marriage. (This is an old as time, and utterly fascinating, but still infuriating trope)

We then get almost two decades real-time of Gwen being, and this is not an insult, the Monica Lewinsky of Spider-Man fandom.

The story was never about that, but even if we take it w/ the retcon it was 2 birds w/ one stone.It wasn't about them sleeping together, it was about that fact she was going to out him to the board while also hurting Peter.2 birds one stone

Now back to the present. The retcon of Sins Past still isn't interested in Gwen as a person. It doesn't remotely fix the issue, which wasn't "Gwen slept with Norman" but "Norman slept with a virgin young enough to be his daughter, knocked her up, and then murdered her." What the story is interested in is restoring Gwen as a pure virgin, and that's about it. It goes ridiculously over the top in doing this, if you ask me. The exact specifics of what Norman thought he did with Gwen are so goddamn convoluted and vague he's essentially off scott-free, but when it comes to Gwen... not only do we have to be reassured she was "too classy" for Norman, we also have Peter reassuring the twins that Gwen would have loved them as a mother when she was not, in fact, their mother. (Also classiness is not a shield that will protect someone from an abusive relationship, which is what the Gwen/Norman relationship as presented in Sins Past very much was.)

So essentially, Spencer's run devotes an awful lot of time and effort, none of which makes very much sense, to reassuring everyone that Gwen didn't in fact sleep with Norman and is a virgin again. If you were angry Gwen was "tainted" etc by sleeping with Norman (which was, to reiterate, not cheating on Peter) then yeah, the retcon is great. But it wasn't her who committed the Sin of the original story. It was Norman. Who murdered her and then told Peter, "What use is there in the paltry existence of one useless female?". That hasn't been retconned. Now he's Good and nice thanks to magic and we're supposed to feel sorry for him.

Sins Past retcon did what it could because it was retcon! We've seen that Norman is aware of his actions in multiple comics, w/ editorial interference regarding these issues I highly doubt Spencer could retcon that.

Again I have to disagree, from CCA standards I think Peter and Gwen did sleep together out of wedlock, and even JMS's original pitch was about their kids.And I don't think people cared if she was w/ someone else but more the fact that it was F'ing Norman and that it was retconned in decades later and we know it was forced as editorial.

Also pretty sure Spencer solidified Norman was a creep, and I wouldn't be surprised if he was meant to die at the end of this.I do agree his "redemption" is unearned and he should suffer consequences ASAP.

The Classy line is saying that she had better standards than him(not personality only IMO, I think it means age as well), as opposed to Sins Past Gwen where she was attracted to his "Magnetism".This editorial mandated OOC retcon made Gwen look far weak willed than she was, even though it's still Norman's fault.

Spencer's time was spent to set up the OMD stuff, the Sins Past stuff was 1 or 1/2 a page by Spider-gwen and then 1 line in the finale, and again it's not about her being "pure" but about retconning a editorially mandated OOC retcon making her seem far more weak willed than she was.I do wish they'd undo the story in a way Norman didn't do what he did/thought he did, bt I'll take the win for Gwen.

Yeah I don't think anyone is buying good Norman, except maybe Marvel staff

Tldr:- Sins Past is terrible and misogynistic(can't blame the writer though), but saying that another writer(whose entire run has been about fixing these characters) doing his best to retcon Sins Past while making it all tie into one story(and being betrayed by Marvel editorial by the looks of it) is misogynistic is just plain wrong

You can argue that it didn't fix a lot of the the misogyny of Sins Past(and I'd agree), but saying it was just as(or even more) Misogynistic is just plain false...

Can you back up this rather mean-spirited claim? Nick Lowe was the editor throughout the entirety of Nick Spencer's run on Spider-Man, so when was the before and after? Who are these people you're referring to as cronies?

I think Lowe did step in at the end of Spencer's run and didn't let him end the run the way he wanted, doesn't help that right after we got Peter in a coma while Ben took over but he was written incompetently and then completely changed followed by this run

If you're going to end your run w/ Saying PeterMJ are unbreakable(after a decade of teasing then not following through) you shouldn't follow up w/ this

[Lee]

I think Lowe did step in at the end of Spencer's run and didn't let him end the run the way he wanted

Is this thought based on anything the creative team said, or is it just your own outsider speculation?

[Matt Rat]

Is this thought based on anything the creative team said, or is it just your own outsider speculation?

You can tell just from reading the book

[Spiderfan001]

Is this thought based on anything the creative team said, or is it just your own outsider speculation?

You can tell from just reading it tbh

But the after letters page had indications that they didn't end well as well, not to mention Spencer going to substack right after

[PanicPixieDreamGirl]

...

I'm cutting the writing team who retconned Sins Past (not just Spencer) less slack because by 2021 there had been multiple social movements about gendered power dynamics and sex, and well, why real-life billionaires who bang much younger women are gross. Norman still walks away smelling of roses.

[wleakr]

Voted Slott.

Reading since late 70’s. Spencer was the writer that made me drop the book. I returned when it was announced he was leaving and came back to see the ending of Kindred. Did not enjoy how his run started (split Peter/Spider-Man arc that explored absolutely nothing about the separated individuals) or the ending (which was one big “meh”).

To be fair, Spencer was on the book for a relatively short time, so comparing to Slott’s longevity seems like apples and oranges. Even for those that didn’t enjoy Slott overall, between his solo run and BND, most had at least one or 2 arcs they enjoyed during his run.

For me, the setup and reveal of placing Ock as Superior is tough to top. Even more so if you weren’t spoiled prior.

There was nothing I enjoyed of Spencer.

[Matt Rat]

I will never understand what anyone sees in Superior.

Spencer had way more enjoyable arcs than the four Slott managed overall for me.

[Tmacaoni]

I think I like Slott overall for the Spider side of the corner, but for the character of Spider-man, I enjoy Spencer take. I usually like the support crew of a main cast and Slott introduced more interesting people for me than Spencer did. Villains got upgraded to be more a threat through Slott. I just hated that he had no love for Black Cat.

[Spiderfan001]

I'm cutting the writing team who retconned Sins Past (not just Spencer) less slack because by 2021 there had been multiple social movements about gendered power dynamics and sex, and well, why real-life billionaires who bang much younger women are gross. Norman still walks away smelling of roses.

Again I agree but how is the guy whose trying to fix stuff the problem? He didn't writer Sins Past, he didn't write Gwen OR Norman doing the deed.He just cleared Gwen's name from a OOC moment(it's literally smth editorial did, not even a writer's idea) while also stating that she wasn't the angel fans think she was.

And Norman literally got "fixed" by a magic thingmajig, there was no redemption and Spencer showed us that Norman was always a terrible human being.If you read Spencer's run and though Norman in as whole smelled like roses then that's on you

I will never understand what anyone sees in Superior.

Spencer had way more enjoyable arcs than the four Slott managed overall for me.

FR, literally SA's women half his age and everyone is dumb af for it to even remotely work

Not to mention Spencer fixed so much stuff as well

[Frontier]

Nothing happened in those early issues. They were literally all retreads of earlier stories. It made them redundant to read.

Only one I really liked was Lifetime Achievement, and even then, the reveal with Foswell at the end was incredibly cringey.

Well, Peter split in his personalities was different. Felicia team-ups were expected but it was necessary to rebuild their relationship and finally fix Felicia.