Amazing Spider-Man #1 preview

[Matt Rat]

The only reason he seemed cool to me was he was a character who actually started as a teen and grew up and got married. I was interested to see his story.

I'm still grateful to have Spider-Girl and RYV around. Both still demonstrate how awesome both Peter and MJ are, while advancing them to the next level of parents and in RYV's case, parents and partners.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Gang the old age was a joke because whatever number you draw the line at, be it 30, 35, etc, it's besides the point. The point is that there seems to be a subset of older readers who grew up with Peter Parker and wanted the character to continue to age with them or at least stay relatable to them. Understandable, but the issue with this is that time moves on and eventually there's newer generations of readers to be catered to. Sure, the dramatic retreads can feel a bit artificial, but maybe another reason why a character (re)learning lessons about holding down relationships and jobs doesn't feel relatable is because those stories are aimed at a younger reader who does relate to those issues.

I don't feel this is a bad thing though! I've had my time with the character echoing my personal young adult life and am fine with reading him as a perpetual 20 something while I age onwards. All teens and young adults deserve a Peter - not a Miles, or Gwen (though they can have them too) - that reflects where they are at that stage in life IMO, one that addresses those growing pains of adolescence crashing into responsibility, relationships and consequences, and I don't feel "read the old stuff" cuts it because as timeless as some tales are, they also deserve a contemporary lens reflecting their own society. Even if the cyclical nature of comics can feel a bit mechanical or cynical, I'm fine to pay it forward.

While I think the sentiment is good and fine, I see some problems with this line of reasoning.

First, I disagree with the notion that there are "life stages". This seems to be the main belief that fuels the justification for OMD, but that's not really how life works. Life isn't a story with a beginning, middle, and end. Life is about learning and growing. It never really stops, and in that sense age is just a number, especially once you reach adulthood. When I was 25 I had friends that were mid 30's and older, I even went bar-hopping with two old people once. Because I reject the way you are framing life, I reject the notion that 25-year old fans and 55-year old fans can't bond over a married 30-year old Spider-Man.

Second, Millennials and Zoomers are the most likely gens to want Peter and MJ together. If you're part of this generation, you were introduced to Spider-Man via TAS, Bendis, Spectacular Spider-Man, or the Raimi films. All of those portrayed Peter and MJ as lifelong soulmates. By contrast, the OMD crowd that dislikes the marriage and (in a lot of cases) MJ herself is more made of older gens. Thus even if we assume we should alienate the older gens, who is to say this justifies the current status quo? We can make an argument that the current status quo is alienating younger fans more than older ones.

Third, if a Peter Parker under 20 is still needed, there are ways of getting one without doing what the ASM comics are doing. Ultimate Spider-Man, The Spectacular Spider-Man, and the last two film franchises all focused on a teen Peter Parker. Two of them especially (Ultimate and Spectacular) are excellent modern retellings and will stand the test of time for decades to come. Given that teenhood is only a fraction of someone's life, and that a lot of people only get into 616 comics when they are older, who's to say that regressing 616 Peter makes sense? I was a teen who read Ultimate and then moved on to Amazing. Even as a teen, I still hated BND. I'm sure there are others who were my age and felt the same.

Fourth, only a small number of people will ever get into 616 comics. Most people will get into Spider-Man through other mediums, and when they pick up comics it will be when they're a little older. And even then, fans that get into comics first catch up on everything through wikis before they read the actual comics. Those fans won't really have a problem with previous continuity or with Peter being older and married.

That's entirely not true. I was 16 when OMD happened and precisely the demographic that they were trying to attract with that move and it could not have turned me off any more if they tried. There also seems to be a lack of awareness that aging up Peter in comics isn't depriving anyone of a younger version because most fans have that version through TV shows and movies and are likely to be introduced through those mediums first anyway. This isn't the 1970s where Spiderman's main source or exposure is on the newspaper racks. All they've done is take away what sets the comic version apart and if anything force the comic version to become more obsolete by not offering anything different. Why even bother reading the comics at all these days?

The aging boomers who run Marvel have no idea what young people want in their comics, what they find relatable, or why they continue to gravitate more and more towards manga even though the movie side continues to thrive. It's actually kind of pathetic that they haven't figured it out at this point.

Anyway, checked out the first issue to give it a shot as I usually do with a new run and I won't be back for more anytime soon. Too bad as I have a ton of nostalgia for JRjr on ASM.

Excellent post.

Case in point about how the comics became obsolete... The most successful versions of Spider-Man in the last five years, including with younger people, have been the Insomniac games, ITSV, and MCU Spider-Man. 2 out of 3 of those feature an older Peter Parker.

[Lee]

The problem is that the other characters mature and Peter doesn't. Harry and Liz have grown up. Ned and Betty have grown up. Miguel has grown up. Even Normie Osborne is at least 7-8 years old. Miles is going to college. Everyone grows up. Your children will still read about 65 year old grandpa Peter, only this Peter will be a lonely, childless old man.

Marvel aren't going to make Peter 65 years old.

edit: In the adaptation, Peter is a teenager because that's his canon. This is how Stan Lee and Steve Ditko created it. This is respect for the school era. But they also made him older when they sent him to college. That's why I love Spider-Man, he's evolving. School, college, adulthood. It is interesting. But it's not interesting when evolution stops.

Read Love and Rockets instead. It's very good.

Almost no one wants to see Peter as a 65-year old grandpa. Batman and Superman are older than Peter and even those guys will never be 65-year old grandpas.

It's a strawman that fans want to age Peter up to old age, and not only to a certain adult age (thirties-ish).

Plus, like someone else said, it's about growth as a person, not about your actual age.

Then wouldn't the eventual complaint be that Peter has been 35 for decades and is no longer growing as a person? Why is freezing Peter at age 35 any better than freezing him at age 25?

Gang the old age was a joke because whatever number you draw the line at, be it 30, 35, etc, it's besides the point. The point is that there seems to be a subset of older readers who grew up with Peter Parker and wanted the character to continue to age with them or at least stay relatable to them. Understandable, but the issue with this is that time moves on and eventually there's newer generations of readers to be catered to. Sure, the dramatic retreads can feel a bit artificial, but maybe another reason why a character (re)learning lessons about holding down relationships and jobs doesn't feel relatable is because those stories are aimed at a younger reader who does relate to those issues.

I don't feel this is a bad thing though! I've had my time with the character echoing my personal young adult life and am fine with reading him as a perpetual 20 something while I age onwards. All teens and young adults deserve a Peter - not a Miles, or Gwen (though they can have them too) - that reflects where they are at that stage in life IMO, one that addresses those growing pains of adolescence crashing into responsibility, relationships and consequences, and I don't feel "read the old stuff" cuts it because as timeless as some tales are, they also deserve a contemporary lens reflecting their own society. Even if the cyclical nature of comics can feel a bit mechanical or cynical, I'm fine to pay it forward.

Exactly. That's just the kind of series it is. New generations of readers keep jumping in and older generations of readers jump out once they've had their fill. That's how Marvel comics has always operated, and will continue to operate.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Then wouldn't the eventual complaint be that Peter has been 35 for decades and is no longer growing as a person?

Why would Peter ever stop growing as a person? That's what the Marvel Editors want, not what fans want.

Why is freezing Peter at age 35 any better than freezing him at age 25?

We are being way too semantic with numbers. Fans just want him to be 25-35 and married.

[Vortex85]

Why would Peter ever stop growing as a person? That's what the Marvel Editors want, not what fans want.

Well, realistically, there is only so much growth as a person you can have until you are idealised and have everything. So I wouldn't put it that way, I think what fans want is Peter to maintain some semblance of growth in his life, never being perfect, but not being put back to the way he was when he started. The marriage gave readers that.

We are being way too semantic with numbers. Fans just want him to be 25-35 and married.

Yes

[The_Sneezing_Stormtrooper]

Marvel aren't going to make Peter 65 years old.



Read Love and Rockets instead. It's very good.



Then wouldn't the eventual complaint be that Peter has been 35 for decades and is no longer growing as a person? Why is freezing Peter at age 35 any better than freezing him at age 25?



Exactly. That's just the kind of series it is. New generations of readers keep jumping in and older generations of readers jump out once they've had their fill. That's how Marvel comics has always operated, and will continue to operate.

There seems to be some idea that 616 comic Spiderman in his current form needs to be encased in amber because he's going to be around FOREVER when he hasn't even come close to being around for a full century. That's quite an assumption considering that I'm not even 100% sure that our planet will last another 100 years, let alone Spiderman.

Let the character develop naturally. Batman and Superman have developed to the point where each of them having kids makes sense so who's to say the same won't eventually happen with Spiderman? Maybe in 30 years time Miles will get to the point where his popularity will dwarf Peter's and it'll make the most sense to have him fill the role of main Spiderman. Who knows? If they did age him up to 35 and after decades that became stale as well then maybe at that point it might be time to push him forward a little bit again. As long as readers have a younger Spiderman (whether Miles, May, an alternate Peter or someone else) to read about and a younger Peter appearing in TV and movies or other media then what exactly are younger fans being deprived of?

Either way, I think kneecapping the characters progression and making him less interesting now just incase we still need him to be a 20-something in the exact same comic continuity 200 years from now seems ridiculous to me and more of a detriment to the book overall long-term.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Well, realistically, there is only so much growth as a person you can have until you are idealised and have everything. So I wouldn't put it that way, I think what fans want is Peter to maintain some semblance of growth in his life, never being perfect, but not being put back to the way he was when he started. The marriage gave readers that.

The kind of teen growth where he is at rock bottom and doesn't know anything about himself would stop like it stops for most people, but as a person none of us stop growing even after we become more well-rounded on the surface. Same can be true for Peter, I think.

[Lee]

Why would Peter ever stop growing as a person? That's what the Marvel Editors want, not what fans want.

It's untenable. The fans making these complaints want Peter to grow in the direction of becoming wiser, smarter, happier, more successful, more mature and more responsible. If he's getting more wise and mature and responsible every year of publication, eventually there's going to be a dead end where there are no new life lessons to be learned. And god forbid Peter should fumble, fall back into old habits, or repeat past mistakes, like normal people do all the time, because those fans would then complain about it being character regression.

We are being way too semantic with numbers. Fans just want him to be 25-35 and married.

The best course of action, for the fans who cannot enjoy Spider-Man comics unless he's married, is to stop reading the series until/unless Marvel decides to marry him again.

The most extreme fans have spent a part of their day, almost every day, for the past 14 years, complaining about the marital status of a super-hero in a comic aimed at teenagers. It's silly, it's a waste of time and energy, and ironically at odds with the maturity they wish to see in Peter Parker.

[Lukmendes]

The story is a timeless examination of just how far Peter and MJ are willing to go for one another, how they never give up on one another, and makes it quite clear MJ only ever intends to share herself with Peter and not to take marriage for granted. It's a celebration of love and qualifies among the many jumping off points for the franchise in general, and was nominated for an Eisner. Something Spider-Man has rarely accomplished since.

Eh, just saw Peter and MJ narrating in boringly generic ways and I wasn't really caring about what's going on, then we get to the ending, which's actually pretty sweet and I found it nice when Spencer used the same scene in ASM#1 vol 5.

You're very much in the minority.

Doesn't matter, I don't make my opinions to follow the majority or minority.

So Chi-Town, the guy Lowe referenced in the afterword letter, gave his review on the Crawlspace and it's a 'D' from him. He's also heard a good number of people are considering dropping the comic

Did Chi-Town make a comment about the comment Lowe made about him?

Why would they? Had I picked up my comic and saw Peter was the way he is today I would figure its a waste of time to get into him if nothing ever changes and he keeps going back to the same miserable state of having nothing.

The only reason he seemed cool to me was he was a character who actually started as a teen and grew up and got married. I was interested to see his story.

That and comics are expensive, far harder to get into, and the quality of writing is a fucking roller coaster, manga by generally having the same writer and artist, are more consistent, be it great, garbage, and everything in between.

[The_Sneezing_Stormtrooper]

It's untenable. The fans making these complaints want Peter to grow in the direction of becoming wiser, smarter, happier, more successful, more mature and more responsible. If he's getting more wise and mature and responsible every year of publication, eventually there's going to be a dead end where there are no new life lessons to be learned. And god forbid Peter should fumble, fall back into old habits, or repeat past mistakes, like normal people do all the time, because those fans would then complain about it being character regression.



The best course of action, for the fans who cannot enjoy Spider-Man comics unless he's married, is to stop reading the series until/unless Marvel decides to marry him again.

The most extreme fans have spent a part of their day, almost every day, for the past 14 years, complaining about the marital status of a super-hero in a comic aimed at teenagers. It's silly, it's a waste of time and energy, and ironically at odds with the maturity they wish to see in Peter Parker.

There is a canyon-wide amount of difference between Peter outgrowing any and all character flaws and where he is now. Peter had flaws during the marriage years. Peter had flaws during Spider-girl when he was a parent to a teenage daughter. They're just different flaws that are appropriate for the stage of life he is at in those comics. The flaws he exhibits in ASM are often more fitting of a 19 year old than someone in their late twenties. They're also often used as an excuse to have him make wilding bad and IMO out of character decisions for the sole reason of moving the plot along instead of finding a more organic way to tell a story. That's the problem. Peter's flaws make him relatable when they're treated as an aspect of his character and not his entire personality. I don't know too many adults that have completely ironed out all of their flaws regardless of age, do you?

What those fans want is for Spiderman stories to build on themselves and reward the readers of their loyalty. When you spend the last few years building up Peter and MJ again and then have them immediately break up off screen during a 6 month time skip then it's not satisfying storytelling to read. It's not about Peter's age or the marriage even. It's about not having Marvel insult long term readers intelligence by shifting directions in the laziest way possible over and over again in the name of "putting toys back in the box".

I fully agree with encouraging people to not buy the book until Marvel decides to fix these issues though. There are plenty of old Spiderman books to enjoy and even some new ones like the JM DeMatteis Ben book, Life Story or even something like that What If where Spiderman kept the Venom symbiote that came out a bit ago. Stop torturing yourselves by reading something you dislike when there are plenty of other places to enjoy a version of Spiderman that you might like more.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

It's untenable. The fans making these complaints want Peter to grow in the direction of becoming wiser, smarter, happier, more successful, more mature and more responsible. If he's getting more wise and mature and responsible every year of publication, eventually there's going to be a dead end where there are no new life lessons to be learned. And god forbid Peter should fumble, fall back into old habits, or repeat past mistakes, like normal people do all the time, because those fans would then complain about it being character regression.

I'm very skeptic about this. I don't know if anyone ever reaches a dead end where they can no longer keep growing as a person. If human lifespan was more than 100 years, I'm sure people would continue the cycle of learning and growing for as long as they live. The brain is a bio-computer, after all. And computers are programmed to constantly learn and adapt to new environments and events.

The most extreme fans have spent a part of their day, almost every day, for the past 14 years, complaining about the marital status of a super-hero in a comic aimed at teenagers. It's silly, it's a waste of time and energy, and ironically at odds with the maturity they wish to see in Peter Parker.

Is it, though? The average Marvel reader is at least in their 20's.

[Frontier]

It's not even close to me, that story just has Spidey and MJ thinking that they love each other very much in rather generic ways, JMS did so in ways that felt like Peter and MJ were talking.

I always felt that the story by itself isn't that good too, but got overrated because it happened right before OMD.

Wait, to have and to hold or Jenkins?

[Lukmendes]

Wait, to have and to hold or Jenkins?

Meant Sensational Annual is meh to me, not Jenkins in general (Who I don't remember what he worked with to have a proper opinion).

Also isn't Sensational Annual written by Matt Fraction?

[CrimsonEchidna]

Okay, I re-read the issue and you're telling me Aunt May had to sell her house to pay off part of whatever debt Peter accrued thanks to his double life and he still can't find it in himself to tell her about being Spider-Man?

[Frontier]

Meant Sensational Annual is meh to me, not Jenkins in general (Who I don't remember what he worked with to have a proper opinion).

Also isn't Sensational Annual written by Matt Fraction?

Oh wow, I'm kind of surprised you didn't like the annual.