Is it time for Spider-Man to "grow up"?

[Hoodj]

Dick Grayson became Nightwing 40 years after he debuted as a 12-year old boy, and it didn't hurt him.

Spider-Man will not only be "fine", he already is/was. It's just that Editorial chooses to ignore it.

Spider-Man isn't dick greyson, and cannot be like him because Dick's personality is the enemy of Spider-Man's concept, a total giga chad jock type who acts like a true leader and paragon amongst men . Peter.....he's meant to appeal to the fans who don't know what's thats like, since their to busy being dorks or weirdos at school.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Spider-Man isn't dick greyson, and cannot be like him because Dick's personality is the enemy of Spider-Man's concept, a total giga chad jock type who acts like a true leader and paragon amongst men . Peter.....he's meant to appeal to the fans who don't know what's thats like, since their to busy being dorks or weirdos at school.

Completely not what Dick or Peter are like, but okay.

[godisawesome]

Spider-Man isn't dick greyson, and cannot be like him because Dick's personality is the enemy of Spider-Man's concept, a total giga chad jock type who acts like a true leader and paragon amongst men . Peter.....he's meant to appeal to the fans who don't know what's thats like, since their to busy being dorks or weirdos at school.

I get what you’re trying to argue, but I think it’s relevant that Peter was well out of college and adjusted to being an adult man who’d had several major love interests and managed to befriend his former bully by the time Dick started to become that kind of leader character and “the man you want to be” character - and that considering how much of Dick’s maturation and change is likely owed to the Bronze Age maturation of comics that Peter was used to kick off, it likely reflects where Peter had actually passed Dick for quite a while as an audience surrogate.

If anything, while Dick changed to become a bit more of the “popular kid” archetype eventually, it’s likely his growth was actually inspired by Peter having gone from a nerd to a guy who was managing to juggle growing up, super-heroing, and dating a vivacious red-head all at once.

And pretty much ever since Peter entered college, he’s actually been portrayed as significantly older than Dick; even when Spidey was being “frozen” at editorial’s preferred age, Dick got frozen earlier in his.

And Dick’s transformation into Nightwing only occurred about two years before Peter was married.

[Refrax5]

How do you define grown up? Because when Dan Slott was writing Spider-Man he had a high paying job that he was excelling at, he was in a committed relation with Carlie Cooper, he owned his own home, he was using his spare time to become the best Spider-Man he could be and he was shown to be respected by the super hero community. All that strikes me as pretty grown up.

But when I came to this board in the early 2010s when those books were being published everyone was complaining he was too immature.

In my experience when people ask for Peter to grow up what they really mean is they want a return to the pre OMD continuity. It doesn’t matter how successful Peter is or how competent Spider-Man is people will complain he’s to immature until he’s married to Mary Jane again.

The way Slott wrote Peter's personality made him come off as overly immature and annoying, but I mostly agree with you. Honestly, I just feel like since OMD, there's been this very artificial "young" persona they've tried to give him that just feels awkward. I don't really want or need Peter to be a dad in the main continuity (I don't think babies or toddlers make for especially interesting characters or plot points), but I do wish he was still married.

More than anything, I just wish he was written more like he was in the early 90s, where he was intelligent, formidable, and determined. He was funny, but he wasn't clownish or incompetent. I almost feel like the Chris Pine Spidey from the first Spider-Verse is a good baseline, where he's experienced and confident, but still young and imperfect. I just feel like the goofy sad-sack Peter characterization is so played out by this point.

[Garlador]

0EB48102-4A39-4752-B446-88CF384C2445.jpg
I’m reminded of this scene where 616 Peter meets Ultimate May.

[Mike]

IS IT TIME FOR SPIDER-MAN TO "GROW UP"?
Nope!

[Garlador]

Re-reading the 70s run and it’s so very clear even in 1974 that Peter is grown up and views his childhood as something he’s moved beyond.

Read the issue today where he’s staying with Flash after his apartment was blown up, and he straight up says the illusion of youth is shattered seeing how much he and Flash have grown from bully and nerd to really close friends who stay up all night bonding over their stories, Flash’s military service, Gwen’s memory, and their friends’ upcoming wedding.

[clonegeek]

Re-reading the 70s run and it’s so very clear even in 1974 that Peter is grown up and views his childhood as something he’s moved beyond.

Read the issue today where he’s staying with Flash after his apartment was blown up, and he straight up says the illusion of youth is shattered seeing how much he and Flash have grown from bully and nerd to really close friends who stay up all night bonding over their stories, Flash’s military service, Gwen’s memory, and their friends’ upcoming wedding.

The Spider-Man editoral claim to miss, never estisted

[Daibhidh]

I think there's a difference between Peter being naturally young because that's his background and being "Young" because it's been decided that is a feature of his character that must be preserved at all costs (apart from, not becoming CEO of a major company, not having contemporaries with preteen children, etc).
Even if you put the genie back into the bottle it's now a genie that has been forced back into the bottle.

[marhawkman]

I think there's a difference between Peter being naturally young because that's his background and being "Young" because it's been decided that is a feature of his character that must be preserved at all costs (apart from, not becoming CEO of a major company, not having contemporaries with preteen children, etc).
Even if you put the genie back into the bottle it's now a genie that has been forced back into the bottle.

And also they used to write Pete as a dad. Soo.....

Of course alt-Us that are "non-canon" will have Spider-dad.

[godisawesome]

I think there's a difference between Peter being naturally young because that's his background and being "Young" because it's been decided that is a feature of his character that must be preserved at all costs (apart from, not becoming CEO of a major company, not having contemporaries with preteen children, etc).
Even if you put the genie back into the bottle it's now a genie that has been forced back into the bottle.

There’s also a “you’re only as old as you feel” element to the character. And I think there’s a bit of an interpretation difference from different eras and contexts of Spider-Man; younger versions of the characters tend to be “wise beyond their years” in at least a few ways, while most of the experienced good older Peters end up feeling “young at heart” while still being matured.

Notice how the snarky, trash-talking Peter actually seems to belong far more to experienced Spider-Men, but not so much to younger versions, while all Spider-Men, even the youngest versions, tend to be very self-aware and have a high degree of emotional intelligence that most teenagers don’t. Raimi-verse Spidey was a lot more morose and anxious - as is MCU Spidey, and so was Webb’s Spidey in his first film. Really, it’s only Webb’s Spider-Man in his second movie who gets more theatrically talkative, even though Spidey’s mouthiness is considered a key component of the comic version… even though it wasn’t in his earliest days.

On a related note - I don’t think anyone has ever argued that married Peter was written with an older personality - and I think most of us on both sides of the OMD debate would agree that he had a youthful personality at the time, simply with underlying maturity alongside it. Stylistic criticisms of the marriage period are almost exclusively ones of perception (“Being married makes you old!”) or based off some belief he needs to suffer to be Spider-Man (“Grrrr… He’s coming home to a hot red head every day! He’s not sad enough!”)

[Garlador]

I still think "Is it time for Spider-Man to grow up" is the wrong question.

I think a lot of us just want a Peter Parker to go back to be BEING grown up, or at least acting with the maturity he once had. So many of these older stories I'm re-reading have him reflect on how much his life has transitioned into a stage of adult responsibility that is more intimidating and difficult to navigate than his halcyon days of youth and less accountability.

[Huntsman Spider]

I still think "Is it time for Spider-Man to grow up" is the wrong question.

I think a lot of us just want a Peter Parker to go back to be BEING grown up, or at least acting with the maturity he once had. So many of these older stories I'm re-reading have him reflect on how much his life has transitioned into a stage of adult responsibility that is more intimidating and difficult to navigate than his halcyon days of youth and less accountability.

That's a valid point there.

[Mister Mets]

Why not? He did "grow up" during the original Lee/Ditko run and didn't hinder his popularity. Even people who didn't like where it ultimately took him (a married guy who'd more or less established himself) don't seem to have hated the character in spite of it or found him being an adult to be the "problem" in and of itself.



I think there's a fair point that entertainment has skewed more to serialized content that does progress the story, changes happen and stick, etc. The last Indiana Jones movie embraced the idea that its titular character is retiring age and making the fact that he's changed a lot over the years and that this's going to be his last adventure important plot points (compared to how one of his inspirations, James Bond, remains eternally young and and unchanging no matter how long his movie series runs).

That said, I do think viewers are often willing to suspend disbelief r.e. floating timelines if the conceit is worth the story.



Think his personality, power set, and themes do a good job of making him stand out from the pack. Heck, as we saw pre-2007, he had gotten older and remained clearly himself. Spider-Man was never about youth, so it's not was never the defining trait, anyways.

The books would be different if the characters were allowed to grow earlier.

If Peter and MJ got married in Amazing Spider-Man #200, she might have a different background because Stern and DeFalco focused on her family and fear of commitment.

You could easily have spider-baby by Amazing Spider-Man #250. That came out in late 1983. What would the next 40 years of published comics be like?

Other series reverse heroes having families. Aquaman's infant son was killed off. Barry Allen was killed off to replaced by Wally West.

[Mister Mets]

Honestly this sounds like a pretty good idea, but the glaring problem is still Paul Rabin and the quasi-implied relationship he has with MJ in this plan, and at least to me seems that even if Peter were remember it shouldn't be Peter that puts the foot forward to reconcile at least romantically speaking considering MJ's the one who caused the entire current situation. Also wouldn't we need further clarification whether MJ remembers pre-OMD, and as such her marriage to Peter before such an event.

I came across this post looking for something else.

It would be pretty easy to have Mary Jane initiate a reconciliation. A story where Spider-Man does something dangerous in front of cameras could end with MJ going to his apartment saying that she realized that she can't love anyone else when she saw him in danger on live tv.