Does Manta feel remorse about killing Aquababy?

[married guy]

AdventureComicsVol145249024_f.jpg

The issue in question in case anyone is interested.
Manta's infanticide caused MAJOR rifts between Arthur and Mera AND Garth.
It had ramifications that lasted YEARS.
All at a time when this sort of stuff NEVER happened in comics!
Why DC choose to ignore it baffles me. Manta never has been and never SHOULD be heroic.
He is a cold hearted bastard who may be able to show glimpses of perceived kindness but really is too narcissistic to have any sort of real relationship.

[Digifiend]

Keeping him a villain would make things more interesting for Jackson too. Shouldn't Manta be unhappy that his son is now another Aquaman?

[Frontier]

Keeping him a villain would make things more interesting for Jackson too. Shouldn't Manta be unhappy that his son is now another Aquaman?

Manta barely even cared about the kid when he became Aqualad.

[Bruce Wayne]

Keeping him a villain would make things more interesting for Jackson too. Shouldn't Manta be unhappy that his son is now another Aquaman?

The idea of him being Black Manta's son came from Geoff Johns. I think his interactions with the YJ staff as Chief Creative Officer at DC is what persuaded them to do this idea. But we have zero clue what their interactions would lead up to in the comics. Johns clearly had some idea in Brightest Day, but all the lead up got flushed down the toilet in New 52.

[Jabare]

why would he? also it's not canon, but even if it was... his hatred for Aquaman knows no bounds.

Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth

[Jim Kelly]

The real question is did David Michelinie (the writer) or Paul Levitz (the editor) have any remorse? This was 1977, remember, and killing babies was considered in bad taste back then. This whole dark turn sickened me and I put the blame exactly where it belonged on the creators in forcing the characters into such a situation.

[The Cool Thatguy]

The real question is did David Michelinie (the writer) or Paul Levitz (the editor) have any remorse? This was 1977, remember, and killing babies was considered in bad taste back then. This whole dark turn sickened me and I put the blame exactly where it belonged on the creators in forcing the characters into such a situation.

I would argue that killing babies remains in bad taste, though that wouldn't stop modern writers.

In all seriousness, I don't mind that being wiped from Black Mantra's slate, but they should better define the character so that he act as a villain. Revenge for papa only goes so far, IMO. Especially when the guy was a douche.

[Frontier]

I would argue that killing babies remains in bad taste, though that wouldn't stop modern writers.

In all seriousness, I don't mind that being wiped from Black Mantra's slate, but they should better define the character so that he act as a villain. Revenge for papa only goes so far, IMO. Especially when the guy was a douche.

Admittedly when the son is also a douche...

[Bruce Wayne]

I would argue that killing babies remains in bad taste, though that wouldn't stop modern writers.

In all seriousness, I don't mind that being wiped from Black Mantra's slate, but they should better define the character so that he act as a villain. Revenge for papa only goes so far, IMO. Especially when the guy was a douche.

I think if you contextualize Aquababy with Black Manta's father (assuming if there was a time when these events would have existed together in the Johns Aquaman) that it was kind of the point that it was a long running blood feud between Aquaman and Black Manta in that it's a tit-for-tat starting with the death of Aquaman's father, then Black Manta's father and then Aquababy and on and on. It's not that this idea existed in vaccuum in Johns Aquaman, you had also had the contrary example of Arthur and Mera who were from opposing feuding families/cities who eventually fell in love in a Romeo/Juliet type relationship that showed that the opposite could happen.

And I don't think Johns changed his ideas that much aside from having to throw out Aqualad and Lorena in New 52 and give Ocean Master a bigger role.

[married guy]

The real question is did David Michelinie (the writer) or Paul Levitz (the editor) have any remorse? This was 1977, remember, and killing babies was considered in bad taste back then. This whole dark turn sickened me and I put the blame exactly where it belonged on the creators in forcing the characters into such a situation.

I was surprised it passed the Comics Code.

[The Cool Thatguy]

I think if you contextualize Aquababy with Black Manta's father (assuming if there was a time when these events would have existed together in the Johns Aquaman) that it was kind of the point that it was a long running blood feud between Aquaman and Black Manta in that it's a tit-for-tat starting with the death of Aquaman's father, then Black Manta's father and then Aquababy and on and on. It's not that this idea existed in vaccuum in Johns Aquaman, you had also had the contrary example of Arthur and Mera who were from opposing feuding families/cities who eventually fell in love in a Romeo/Juliet type relationship that showed that the opposite could happen.

And I don't think Johns changed his ideas that much aside from having to throw out Aqualad and Lorena in New 52 and give Ocean Master a bigger role.

The cycle of revenge is an idea that kinda exhausts itself after a while, regardless of who started it. Even Batman and Joker have more than that going on

[williamtheday]

I was surprised it passed the Comics Code.

The Code had been losing strength since the unapproved Spidey drug issues in 1969 didn't hurt sales.

[Lee Stone]

I wouldn't be surprised if we got a new League with Black Adam, Lex Luthor, Lobo, Joker, Black Manta and Dr. Light.
The tagline would be 'we're not evil, we're just misunderstood'.

[Mantis-Ray]

AdventureComicsVol145249024_f.jpg

The issue in question in case anyone is interested.
Manta's infanticide caused MAJOR rifts between Arthur and Mera AND Garth.
It had ramifications that lasted YEARS.
All at a time when this sort of stuff NEVER happened in comics!
Why DC choose to ignore it baffles me. Manta never has been and never SHOULD be heroic.
He is a cold hearted bastard who may be able to show glimpses of perceived kindness but really is too narcissistic to have any sort of real relationship.

I actually just read this issue, recently finishing the Death of the Prince deluxe trade

Quite good stuff and even as vile as the act is, it does give Manta some great villain points

Like people praise Joker for the damage he's done to the Batfam like shooting Barbara or killing Jason, or in Flash's case Thawne killing Barry's mom, but here Manta has committed an atrocity of equal proportion. Dude killed Aquaman's 5 year old kid, that is just awful.

It's why he's so great. His motivation like Reverse-Flash is driven out of the most petty hatred for the hero. "Fuck that guy" is Manta's entire reason for going against Aquaman and its amazingly hilarious.

Shame Arthur Jr. isn't referenced anymore, especially with the birth of Arthur and Mera's second child Andy.