The Problem With Spider-Man Comics Today

[Lee]

I'm not a fan of Miles Morales. There are lots of non-racist reasons to not be interested in a character. But the poster's assertion was that "OMD is culpable in the racism that Miles got".

Blaming One More Day for people disliking Miles Morales would be absurd. But blaming One More Day for people saying racist things about Miles Morales is even more preposterous.

[WebLurker]

I'm still lost on how Miles relates to anything and how it is or is not racist in relation to a reviled retcon in a series he wasn't even in in the first place.

[Lee]

I'm still lost on how Miles relates to anything and how it is or is not racist in relation to a reviled retcon in a series he wasn't even in in the first place.

This post: https://community.cbr.com/showthread...=1#post6254564

The poster said "If anything, OMD is culpable in the racism that Miles got."

It doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

[Mister Mets]

how did miles get rope into this he one of the good ones

My fault kinda.

My view is that One More Day never happened, it would affect the comics we saw published.

So I pointed that out when noting Spider-Man comics involving Miles Morales, a character created after OMD.

I do want to be clear that the comics could also be radically different if Bendis moved to Austin. A change in a writer's environment is going to affect the product.

[marhawkman]

I'm still lost on how Miles relates to anything and how it is or is not racist in relation to a reviled retcon in a series he wasn't even in in the first place.

I think that's the point? People are trying to connect dots that don't connect?

[Agent Z]

To get back on topic, it feels as though people discount all the stories from the 70s to 00s anyways so the hatred towards BND feels hypocritical.

What are you talking? If anything, those stories are consistently praised by most if not all fans. The only time I see people discount them is when they're defending BND.

[Matt Rat]

My fault kinda.

My view is that One More Day never happened, it would affect the comics we saw published

I don't think so. Miles could still have been introduced down the line if Peter had been allowed to be a father so Marvel would still have a guarantee of a single, youthful Spider-Man.

[Agent Z]

4. Bendis had good intentions, but he was the wrong guy for the part, for the reasons you mentioned. I'll also add that Bendis was too protective of Miles, almost like a father (maybe it had to do with Miles being partly based on Bendis' adopted kids),and didn't put him through the same crap Teen Peter had to go through in Ultimate and in Lee/Ditko. The problem is when you do that, you reinforce the lie that liberal elites cuddle black people and protect them from harm, while the working-class white dudes have to "struggle for everything"(as I'm sure you know, the real world is nothing like that). I do think Bendis reinforced that narrative to an extent, because I remember even liberal fans complaining feeling like there was an air of "woke capitalism" to early Miles Morales.

Miles going through what Peter did would be accused of being repetitive and he already got flack for being a bright kid who got his powers from a spider bite. And it's not like Miles's life was sunshine and roses, what with his uncle being a villain, his mother dying and his father hating superheroes.

4a. If Bendis was the only guy Marvel could find for Miles Morales, we could at least say they tried their best.., but was he really? I'm sure there were tons, and I mean tons of writers (Black and Hispanic writers especially) who would've loved to create the first black Spider-Man. The reason Marvel never approached them, besides Bendis being a big name and them wanting to play it safe, is because historically Marvel didn't have the best track record with hiring non-white writers. Therefore Marvel can be blamed for Bendis' shortcomings on this one.

Bendis was the one who came up with the idea of a black Spider-Man in the first place. Editorial just wanted to kill off Peter, but making his replacement an Afro-Latino boy was all Bendis's idea. He approached them, not the other way around.

5. Overall, there was a level of antagonism to the way Marvel and online pundits talked about anyone who was upset with Ultimate Peter being replaced. They didn't exactly call everyone racist, but they did act like anyone upset with the idea was some very callous person that didn't care about racism. The problem with doing that is that (1) the Clone Saga proved that even when you replace Peter with a Caucasian with blonde hair and blue eyes, fans will still get pissed and hate the new guy, so not all of Miles' backlash can be attributed to racism, and (2) tribalism is a thing, meaning some people will always join the "other side" once they're demonized and ignored like that (look at the people who voted for Trump just to spite Clinton - they weren't the majority of Trump voters in 2016, but they still had a bit of an impact). Point is, that too could have been avoided, just like Hillary calling people "deplorables" could have been avoided.

White legacy characters can face an uphill battle with fans, but rarely do they ever get the same rage and venom as non-white legacies. The only instances where a white legacy character drew hatred comparable to a minority one are Kyle Rayner in the 90s and Otto Octavius during the Superior Spider-Man arc.

For comparison, Miles replaced a Peter Parker who died fighting to protect his loved ones. Ben Reilly replaced Peter because Marvel wanted a Spider-Man who was single and didn't have children, even going as far as having Peter strike MJ in a fit of rage, something that would have irreparably a less popular character as Hank Pym fans can attest to.

I'll agree that not all of Miles's backlash was motivated by racism, but it's hard to deny that much if not most of it was and unfortunately it ended up poisoning the well.

5a. Going back to OMD... If you were one of the people upset with Ultimate Peter being replaced, especially if you navigated to Ultimate after OMD/BND ruined 616 Peter for you, you now only have Slott's Peter to read month to month... Even worse, you have to put up with gaslighting from online writers telling you you're making a big deal out of the death because "Peter in the main continuity is still alive", when you know that doesn't mean anything after OMD.

Being as fair as possible, did anyone actually think Marvel would have killed Peter off permanently? Superior Spider-Man wasn't even the first time Peter had died.

[Kevinroc]

Just a quick side note. DC later revealed that Kyle Rayner’s father was from Mexico, which means Kyle is Irish-Mexican (very similar to Spider-Man 2099/Miguel O’Hara).

[Lee]

What are you talking? If anything, those stories are consistently praised by most if not all fans. The only time I see people discount them is when they're defending BND.

Out of those hundreds and hundreds of issues, people tend to only talk about the "important" stories and not the greater number of ordinary stories between them. Some of those ordinary stories are very good, some are bad, and most are perfectly average, serviceable affairs.

[Mister Mets]

Some fans like it, but it's a very divisive story. At best, it is still nowhere near as well received or impactful as Scott Snyder's Batman. The Court of Owls stuck around in comics and are still alluded to in multiple mediums since their debut. Likewise, Snyder's Riddler story went on to influence all versions of the Riddler, including Reeves' film.

Superior has none of that going for it. Honestly, Superior doesn't get brought up or adapted period unless Slott is directly involved. Nick Lowe tried to hype up Superior at D23 this year and got nothing but awkward silence from the crowd.

The reason I brought up the New 52 is because in many ways it was DC's equivalent to BND. It was a relaunch that came around the same time that retconned old continuity for the purpose of bringing in new fans. In spite of it being more critically successful and impactful than anything in BND, most people (including DC themselves) still consider it a failure, which is why DC Rebirth happened (the DC equivalent of what undoing OMD would be).

Point is, if we can acknowledge the New 52 relaunch was ultimately unjustified in spite of gems like Scott Snyder's Batman and Morrison's Superman... I don't see what justification there was for the clearly-inferior BND relaunch.

The New 52 was bigger than OMD with much more confusing continuity, since it affected every title. That's where it collapsed in on itself.

There was some good stuff, but the questions weren't just about what went well. It was much more radical in the changes.

As a reader, I can sympathize with the artist being under some very tight deadlines (I actually think Nick Dragotta is a talented artist when he isn't being rushed). But if I were a reviewer? Look at Peter's eyes in the first panel of that page. Look at Peter's face in the final panel. Look at Gwen's face in the penultimate panel.

This art is clearly rushed. Any comic that features art that looks like this should not have an "8" on any kind of official review. Unless it's an 8 out of 100. I can't take this scene seriously.

I don't think it's that bad, and it's fine in context.

To be more specific, a lot of "normies" happily joined in bashing Miles with people that were racist, and there are many factors for that, but one of them was Marvel depriving fans of a good ongoing Peter Parker run from all universes.



Some fans like it, but it's a very divisive story. At best, it is still nowhere near as well received or impactful as Scott Snyder's Batman. The Court of Owls stuck around in comics and are still alluded to in multiple mediums since their debut. Likewise, Snyder's Riddler story went on to influence all versions of the Riddler, including Reeves' film. Superior has none of that going for it. Honestly, Superior doesn't get brought up or adapted period unless Slott is directly involved. Nick Lowe tried to hype up Superior at D23 this year and got nothing but awkward silence from the crowd.

The reason I brought up the New 52 is because in many ways it was DC's equivalent to BND. It was a relaunch that came around the same time that retconned old continuity for the purpose of bringing in new fans. In spite of it being more critically successful and impactful than anything in BND, most people (including DC themselves) still consider it a failure, which is why DC Rebirth happened (the DC equivalent of what undoing OMD would be).

Point is, if we can acknowledge the New 52 relaunch was ultimately unjustified in spite of gems like Scott Snyder's Batman and Morrison's Superman... I don't see what justification there was for the clearly-inferior BND relaunch.

When it comes to reception, personal taste is irrelevant. The discussion is about things that can be objectively measured. Spider-Verse is not one of my ten favorite Dan Slott Spider-Man stories, but it's on a high number of "Best of" lists, so I can't really argue about how it is received.

Kevinroc beat me to it, but your argument is essentially that "expert" opinions online matter more than what everyone else thinks.

Putting aside the elitist nature of this argument, big writers who write Comic Book articles and "Best of" lists are subject to the same demands for sensationalism as CNN journalists. Of course that they're going to hype up the most recent comics in the industry. You won't find a lot of IGN or CBR articles trashing any recent major runs, even if they're bad.

It's not that I value elite opinion more, but I'm looking for things that can't be gamed.

Comics Roundup looks at online reviews, good and bad. So it gives a sense of the aggregate.

We can also look through "Best of" lists to see what's considered worth recommending.

It's harder to figure out what everyone else thinks. A message board conversation might not be representative of the larger community, and can also be shaped by a handful of active posters whose views might not be typical of the participants in the discussion.

I don't think so. Miles could still have been introduced down the line if Peter had been allowed to be a father so Marvel would still have a guarantee of a single, youthful Spider-Man.

If you change the environment in which Bendis had the idea for the character, it's very likely it won't go the same way.

[Kevinroc]

I don't think it's that bad, and it's fine in context..

What context can make art that looks like this "fine"? This is art from an officially published issue of Amazing Spider-Man, Marvel's flagship title. And if I were an official reviewer, I would have to knock the score down for art that looks like this.

[PCN24454]

I don't think so. Miles could still have been introduced down the line if Peter had been allowed to be a father so Marvel would still have a guarantee of a single, youthful Spider-Man.

We don't need a youthful Spider-Man. We need someone that's actually a character.

[Agent Z]

Out of those hundreds and hundreds of issues, people tend to only talk about the "important" stories and not the greater number of ordinary stories between them. Some of those ordinary stories are very good, some are bad, and most are perfectly average, serviceable affairs.

It would be absurd to hold every single issue out of hundreds across four decades to the same esteem, let alone remember all of them. That is not the same thing as discounting them, which is what the user I responded to was saying.

[WebLurker]

Been thinking about this video I stumbled on a lot lately in regards to a few threads on the forum r.e. runs writing the characters differently than before: