Spider-Island and the MC-2 Universe returns in Secret Wars...

[Pav]

Because, of course, Mayday's relationship with her family & her dad in particular wasn't the central part of her book.

MC2 is about family and tradition. Old Peter was her mentor as well as her father, had his spider powers still completely intact and was her reason for becoming Spider-Girl in the first place. He and MJ were present in practically every book, and they teamed up on multiple occasions. What you are saying here is equivalent to saying that Mr. Miyagi is not important and is the least interesting character in the Karate Kid movies. Fact is, if Marvel had started a Spider-Girl series without Peter and MJ being an integral part, it would have completely failed.

Fair points, each. I still don't see Peter as "the heart and soul" of the MC2 universe - that's Mayday, in my mind - but I do think you guys explain why he could be considered the "heart and soul" of the Spider-Girl book itself. But please: don't rely on strawman argument's, Scott Taylor. Me saying that Peter isn't the heart and soul of the MC2 universe is totally not the same as me saying that he is "not important and...is the least interesting character." Those two things don't jive at all. I put enough words in my own mouth; I don't need help. (Oh, and Scott: you have no evidence that a Spider-Girl series without Peter and MJ would've failed. There's no evidence that such a series would've succeeded though, either.)

It also makes Mayday into a cookie cutter character with tragedy in her past rather than a uniquely positive character who had a great upbringing and whose parents are still alive. Those are the reasons I am upset about his death. Because it pretty much ruins the reason for the entire universe to exist.

You and I both know that she can be a "uniquely positive character" while still having tragedy in her past. And actually, the fact that she DOES have tragedy in her past makes her positive demeanor all the more important and compelling, in my mind. It's easy to be happy when nothing terrible has happened. (Plus, she wasn't without some tragedy in her life already: the death of Crazy 8 weighed on her conscience pretty heavily.)

this is targeted specifically at her existing fanbase anyway. If anyone goes back to her old stuff it'll be because of what Tom & Ron did, not Slott.

I'm sure Marvel expects that a lot of MC2 lovers will buy this, yes. I'm sure they're also hoping that people who enjoyed Spider-Verse will buy it. I'm sure they're also hoping that people who are buying Secret Wars-related comics will buy it. I'm sure they're hoping that people who liked Spider-Island will buy it. In essence, while the MC2 fans will be there, I'm sure that Marvel is hoping that new readers will also find these new stories about Mayday compelling. And to your second sentence quoted above: just because you think that's the reality doesn't make it the reality. You have no proof of that. You have no evidence of that. All you have is a belief, and beliefs are fuzzy things. And if you are correct - if new fans find Mayday because of these stories from Tom and Ron, the fact remains that we are only getting these stories because Slott decided to use Mayday in Spider-Verse. Any appearances, any rise in popularity that may come is because of Slott's choice to include her in his stories.

You can't just kill off Peter & then replace him with someone else & shrug and say 'eh, close enough'. Especially as Slott basically did it and tossed the story back to DeFalco & Frenz to deal with.

Yeah, well if he does, it raise the question of why Slott messed things up in the first place?

See, this shows me that you just can't (or won't) think about things from the writer's perspective. Slott didn't "mess things up." He picked up Mayday's story and started things moving again. You just don't like the direction he chose, and fair enough. But EVERY STORY needs things to be "messed up" - that's called conflict. It's what makes a story work, moves the characters into action, creates dramatic tension, etc, etc. Further, your description of Peter being replaced with Uncle Ben isn't accurate; you have to think about it from a storytelling perspective: Mayday, as has been noted, has had a pretty good run at superheroing and her positive personality speaks to that. But now, how will she deal with the death of her father, her mentor, her hero? And simultaneously, how will she deal with the introduction of the man who is supposed to be her hero's hero - the man her father looked up to and spoke so warmly about? This is drama. This is conflict.

It is unfortunate that the choices Slott made have made some of you folks unhappy, but I continue to find it disconcerting that you'd rather have no new Spider-Girl stories at all than have new stories that aren't exactly what you want. Aren't you interested in seeing how Mayday deals with the loss of Peter? Aren't you interested in seeing if she can redeem this Uncle Ben? Aren't you just happy that there are still people at Marvel who find her to be a character with writing about? I'd love to see SHOC used again, even if it wasn't exactly in a way that I hoped for. (And I have SHOC stories written in my head and on my computer; I'm about as invested in SHOC as anyone else on the planet.)

I reserve the right to comment on his poor decisions re:Spider-Girl indefinitely.

Yeah, you've said that before. And I've answered with this: just because you have the right to do something doesn't make it worth doing. You have the right to smoke cigarettes: doesn't mean it's a good habit. You have the right to get drunk as a skunk every night of your life: doesn't mean it's a good habit. You have the right to complain and complain and complain: doesn't mean it's a good habit.

Oh Pav. Poor, sweet, naive Pav. Has complaining about any past event ever gone away on the Spider-boards?

Ha! Right you are, Rob. With great posting power comes great complain-ability.

-Pav, who misses SHOC...

[Cmbmool]

I'm sure Marvel expects that a lot of MC2 lovers will buy this, yes. I'm sure they're also hoping that people who enjoyed Spider-Verse will buy it. I'm sure they're also hoping that people who are buying Secret Wars-related comics will buy it. I'm sure they're hoping that people who liked Spider-Island will buy it. In essence, while the MC2 fans will be there, I'm sure that Marvel is hoping that new readers will also find these new stories about Mayday compelling. And to your second sentence quoted above: just because you think that's the reality doesn't make it the reality. You have no proof of that. You have no evidence of that. All you have is a belief, and beliefs are fuzzy things. And if you are correct - if new fans find Mayday because of these stories from Tom and Ron, the fact remains that we are only getting these stories because Slott decided to use Mayday in Spider-Verse. Any appearances, any rise in popularity that may come is because of Slott's choice to include her in his stories.



See, this shows me that you just can't (or won't) think about things from the writer's perspective. Slott didn't "mess things up." He picked up Mayday's story and started things moving again. You just don't like the direction he chose, and fair enough. But EVERY STORY needs things to be "messed up" - that's called conflict. It's what makes a story work, moves the characters into action, creates dramatic tension, etc, etc. Further, your description of Peter being replaced with Uncle Ben isn't accurate; you have to think about it from a storytelling perspective: Mayday, as has been noted, has had a pretty good run at superheroing and her positive personality speaks to that. But now, how will she deal with the death of her father, her mentor, her hero? And simultaneously, how will she deal with the introduction of the man who is supposed to be her hero's hero - the man her father looked up to and spoke so warmly about? This is drama. This is conflict.

It is unfortunate that the choices Slott made have made some of you folks unhappy, but I continue to find it disconcerting that you'd rather have no new Spider-Girl stories at all than have new stories that aren't exactly what you want. Aren't you interested in seeing how Mayday deals with the loss of Peter? Aren't you interested in seeing if she can redeem this Uncle Ben? Aren't you just happy that there are still people at Marvel who find her to be a character with writing about? I'd love to see SHOC used again, even if it wasn't exactly in a way that I hoped for. (And I have SHOC stories written in my head and on my computer; I'm about as invested in SHOC as anyone else on the planet.)




-Pav, who misses SHOC...

There were OTHER WAYS for Slott to pull this off and still get the results he wanted. TO me, the way he did this just was a bit sign of disrespect to not only the creators, but the fans, even though Slott and some others don't see it that way.

[Dan Slott]

There were OTHER WAYS for Slott to pull this off and still get the results he wanted. TO me, the way he did this just was a bit sign of disrespect to not only the creators, but the fans, even though Slott and some others don't see it that way.

Stan Lee & Steve Ditko created Gwen Stacy. Was it disrespectful for Gerry Conway to kill her off?
Bill Mantlo & Sal Buscema created Jean DeWolff. Was it disrespectful for Peter David to kill her off (w/o a heroic death, by opening a door)?
Len Wein & Ross Andru created Marla Jameson. Was it disrespectful of me to kill her off?

I remember the "sturm und drang" here over the apparent beheading Roderick Kingsley/Hobgoblin.
All the cries of "disrespect" to Roger Stern. I reached out to Roger on the side and asked if he was okay. He had no problem with it (and he even correctly figured out-- w/o any prompting-- how Roderick survived. 'Cause, hey, it's comics.)

I understand when a character death upsets a reader. (They're kinda supposed to.) But when you reach the point where you feel "disrespected"-- or someone has "spat in your face" or "sh*t all over something (you) loved"-- (I've heard it all)-- that's when you probably need to dial it back a skosh.

Every character is someone's favorite. And if every character is kept safe or placed in amber, stories would get really old & boring FAST.
That's the truth of it.

(If this seems like something you strongly disagree with, then dear God, whatever you do, don't read or watch GAME OF THRONES!) ;-)

[Cmbmool]

Stan Lee & Steve Ditko created Gwen Stacy. Was it disrespectful for Gerry Conway to kill her off?
Bill Mantlo & Sal Buscema created Jean DeWolff. Was it disrespectful for Peter David to kill her off (w/o a heroic death, by opening a door)?
Len Wein & Ross Andru created Marla Jameson. Was it disrespectful of me to kill her off?

I remember the "sturm und drang" here over the apparent beheading Roderick Kingsley/Hobgoblin.
All the cries of "disrespect" to Roger Stern. I reached out to Roger on the side and asked if he was okay. He had no problem with it (and he even correctly figured out-- w/o any prompting-- how Roderick survived. 'Cause, hey, it's comics.)

I understand when a character death upsets a reader. (They're kinda supposed to.) But when you reach the point where you feel "disrespected"-- or someone has "spat in your face" or "sh*t all over something (you) loved"-- (I've heard it all)-- that's when you probably need to dial it back a skosh.

Every character is someone's favorite. And if every character is kept safe or placed in amber, stories would get really old & boring FAST.
That's the truth of it.

(If this seems like something you strongly disagree with, then dear God, whatever you do, don't read or watch GAME OF THRONES!) ;-)

Those moments were UNEXPECTED and this one wasn't given the whole event of it all. I respect you and your work Mr. Slott, I truly honestly do respect you and your work.

However despite that, I still stand by my original statements. I stand by them because there were OTHER SPIDERS in the MC-2 universe that had more power or two than Peter and Mayday and could have played a role or two during your "visit."

If you could included Kaine, the Scarlet Spider, into the events of Spider-verse, then you could have included the MC-2 Universe version of Kaine, who is much more powerful than Mayday and is sort of her guardian angel.

If you could have had Ben Reilly into the events of Spider-verse, then you could have had the SON of Ben Reilly, who is Darkdevil in the MC-2 universe, making a cameo role in the events of Spider-verse and also acknowledging the legacy of Ben Reilly is not only within the Parker family.

Black Tarantula, Anya, Spider-girl of the 616, in her older self, even Gerry Drew, son of the ORIGINAL Spider-woman, who you also included in the event, all of them had Spider-powers in the MC-2 Universe.

Let it be known I do appreciate what you did for the MC-2 Universe and Spider-girl. I'm honest about that, but given the stories that Tom Defalco and Ron Frenz created, along Pat Olliffe on art, and the legacies they created for that world you could have taken extra time and work and try to at least create or even let them do it, an MC-2 Universe prologue Story that would connect it to the events Spider-verse with this.

I'm not upset about the MC-2 Universe Peter dying in Spider-verse, but what I am upset about is that it could have been prolonged and use to explore the MC-2 Universe and it's Spiders, beyond Mayday and her family, in the "final battles" with Morlun and his family.

I mean for an event called Spider-verse, there was little inter dimensional exploring for the various Spiders in the Marvel Publishing.

Also I never read or saw Game of Thrones, but I heard it was brutal.

[Cmbmool]

The creative teams speak out about the issues..

http://www.comicvine.com/articles/ex...n/1100-151799/

[Dan Slott]

It was "Spider-Verse".
Not "Spider-Verse Guest-Starring The MC2".
All due respect, but from your many passionate posts, I think that's the only approach that would've made you happy.
And that's cool.
Everyone's entitled to their favorite characters and corners of the U.

[ViewtifulJC]

Spider-Verse was too big and unwieldy to focus on any particular group or universe outside Where's Waldo cameos and appearances.

which was part of my main problems with it, but that's another topic

[Confuzzled]

It was "Spider-Verse".
Not "Spider-Verse Guest-Starring The MC2".
All due respect, but from your many passionate posts, I think that's the only approach that would've made you happy.
And that's cool.
Everyone's entitled to their favorite characters and corners of the U.

I'm just miffed you vetoed Olivier Coipel's idea to allow Spider-Punk be Spider-Man UK.

But thanks for choosing a marriage centric story like Renew Your Vows to be the focus point of ASM during Secret Wars. It definitely hasn't gone unappreciated.

[Yvonmukluk]

You and I both know that she can be a "uniquely positive character" while still having tragedy in her past. And actually, the fact that she DOES have tragedy in her past makes her positive demeanor all the more important and compelling, in my mind. It's easy to be happy when nothing terrible has happened. (Plus, she wasn't without some tragedy in her life already: the death of Crazy 8 weighed on her conscience pretty heavily.)

Yes, but that was the call of the creative team; they chose to kill him off and then examined the effects it had on the surviving characters. This was handed down from the top & quite clearly not the story they wanted to tell.

I'm sure Marvel expects that a lot of MC2 lovers will buy this, yes. I'm sure they're also hoping that people who enjoyed Spider-Verse will buy it. I'm sure they're also hoping that people who are buying Secret Wars-related comics will buy it. I'm sure they're hoping that people who liked Spider-Island will buy it. In essence, while the MC2 fans will be there, I'm sure that Marvel is hoping that new readers will also find these new stories about Mayday compelling. And to your second sentence quoted above: just because you think that's the reality doesn't make it the reality. You have no proof of that. You have no evidence of that. All you have is a belief, and beliefs are fuzzy things. And if you are correct - if new fans find Mayday because of these stories from Tom and Ron, the fact remains that we are only getting these stories because Slott decided to use Mayday in Spider-Verse. Any appearances, any rise in popularity that may come is because of Slott's choice to include her in his stories.

Well you see: I'm a realist. MC2 was pretty much done. We all knew it. We all accepted it, and it ended well. Let's be honest: there's not going to be a MC2 renaissance. People have moved on. Hell, this book isn't even promoting the MC2 side of things, it's billed as 'Spider-Island', not 'Spider-Island and MC2'. It doesn't even get its own book! There's not going to be a sudden demand for Spider-Girl; if there was, we'd have gotten a new book years ago. This is just throwing a token bone to the fans.

See, this shows me that you just can't (or won't) think about things from the writer's perspective. Slott didn't "mess things up." He picked up Mayday's story and started things moving again. You just don't like the direction he chose, and fair enough. But EVERY STORY needs things to be "messed up" - that's called conflict. It's what makes a story work, moves the characters into action, creates dramatic tension, etc, etc. Further, your description of Peter being replaced with Uncle Ben isn't accurate; you have to think about it from a storytelling perspective: Mayday, as has been noted, has had a pretty good run at superheroing and her positive personality speaks to that. But now, how will she deal with the death of her father, her mentor, her hero? And simultaneously, how will she deal with the introduction of the man who is supposed to be her hero's hero - the man her father looked up to and spoke so warmly about? This is drama. This is conflict.

Except, again the conflict isn't coming organically from the narrative of her own story, but instead happened in a story where she was a bit player. Contrast Original Sin-everyone was told 'there's going to be a big reveal of a bunch of stuff at random from the watcher's eye', but the creative teams were allowed to decide for themselves what the reveals would be and how to fit it into their story. This was This isn't the story they wanted to tell, they didn't get any input into it, it was dropped into their laps and they were told to deal with it. It's especially jarring since they actually created the character & worked on her for 10 years. Saw what you will about Tom DeFalco, I am fairly certain that he can create drama & conflict without having someone else doing it in another story for him.

It is unfortunate that the choices Slott made have made some of you folks unhappy, but I continue to find it disconcerting that you'd rather have no new Spider-Girl stories at all than have new stories that aren't exactly what you want. Aren't you interested in seeing how Mayday deals with the loss of Peter? Aren't you interested in seeing if she can redeem this Uncle Ben? Aren't you just happy that there are still people at Marvel who find her to be a character with writing about? I'd love to see SHOC used again, even if it wasn't exactly in a way that I hoped for. (And I have SHOC stories written in my head and on my computer; I'm about as invested in SHOC as anyone else on the planet.)

Tell me: why couldn't she have reacted to Ben WITH Peter around? I'd like to see him come to terms with it alongside her. That in itself would have been enough, and I think we'd all be praising Slott for adding a new dynamic if he'd stopped there. But unfortunately, he didn't. As a wise man once said: Better to die as good fiction than live as bad. Especially since Spider-Girl: The End was pretty much the pitch-perfect ending anyway.

Yeah, you've said that before. And I've answered with this: just because you have the right to do something doesn't make it worth doing. You have the right to smoke cigarettes: doesn't mean it's a good habit. You have the right to get drunk as a skunk every night of your life: doesn't mean it's a good habit. You have the right to complain and complain and complain: doesn't mean it's a good habit.

So expressing my opinion is apparently on the same level of alcoholism, now?

Stan Lee & Steve Ditko created Gwen Stacy. Was it disrespectful for Gerry Conway to kill her off?
Bill Mantlo & Sal Buscema created Jean DeWolff. Was it disrespectful for Peter David to kill her off (w/o a heroic death, by opening a door)?
Len Wein & Ross Andru created Marla Jameson. Was it disrespectful of me to kill her off?

I remember the "sturm und drang" here over the apparent beheading Roderick Kingsley/Hobgoblin.
All the cries of "disrespect" to Roger Stern. I reached out to Roger on the side and asked if he was okay. He had no problem with it (and he even correctly figured out-- w/o any prompting-- how Roderick survived. 'Cause, hey, it's comics.)

I understand when a character death upsets a reader. (They're kinda supposed to.) But when you reach the point where you feel "disrespected"-- or someone has "spat in your face" or "sh*t all over something (you) loved"-- (I've heard it all)-- that's when you probably need to dial it back a skosh.

Every character is someone's favorite. And if every character is kept safe or placed in amber, stories would get really old & boring FAST.
That's the truth of it.

(If this seems like something you strongly disagree with, then dear God, whatever you do, don't read or watch GAME OF THRONES!) ;-)

Well it strikes me that it's kind of unfair to kill a major supporting character off and then hand it to somebody else to deal with, especially when a)they worked on the stuff you just changed up for 10 years at least, b)it's not what they themselves would have done,and c)you did it without their consultation. All of those other examples, people had been writing the books for a while previously, while you killed Peter off pretty much as soon as you got your hands on MC2. Most people would usually wait a while to do something drastic like that or stick around for the clean-up. Plus the renaming (going from being the pre-eminent Spider-Girl to being yet another Spider-Woman, whilst there's already one getting her own book published right now-so I don't see Marvel publishing another book with the same title plus an adjective, and it's not like Mayday has a snappy nickname like Spider-Gwen as an alternative) plus the recostuming (which, since the MC2 variant has Mayday in her classic costume-apparently on Nick Lowe's instruction-undermined her iconic appearance, by Marvel's own admission). Honestly, since the entire Marvel Multiverse is presumably getting flushed with Secret Wars (we know the Ultimate Universe is definitively on the chopping block as per the All-New Avengers teaser), all these changes right before the end of everything was kind of poor timing. Especially since you yourself stated the Secret Wars thing wasn't planned, which means basically your initial plan was come in and write the ending for a character you'd never written before and probably never will again, in contrast to the perfectly good one her creators did 5 years ago. The poor girl had a wonderful swan song back in 2010, and now she all she gets to try and wrap up her story for good is a back-up story in another book.

I guess you and I disagree on what the meaning of death in comics is-ultimately I figure it's about telling a good story, not (just) upsetting the reader; a good comic book death should make the reader upset the character's gone, but it shouldn't be an end in and of itself. The deaths in Spider-Verse felt more like they were calculated to create outrage rather than serve the story.

Plus of course, 'dead parent(s)' really isn't that groundbreaking for a teen hero book. Let's see we have Anya, Miles, Peter himself...and that's just Spider-Titles. Killing off a character shouldn't feel like the writer's just ticking off a checklist. Hell, it was BECAUSE May's parents were both happy & healthy that actually set her book apart.

And no, I don't watch game of thrones, because I ultimately find it too depressing. I don't appreciate pointless death getting dragged into other things I like, especially where it doesn't belong.

[Scott Taylor]

Fair points, each. I still don't see Peter as "the heart and soul" of the MC2 universe - that's Mayday, in my mind - but I do think you guys explain why he could be considered the "heart and soul" of the Spider-Girl book itself. But please: don't rely on strawman argument's, Scott Taylor. Me saying that Peter isn't the heart and soul of the MC2 universe is totally not the same as me saying that he is "not important and...is the least interesting character." Those two things don't jive at all. I put enough words in my own mouth; I don't need help. (Oh, and Scott: you have no evidence that a Spider-Girl series without Peter and MJ would've failed. There's no evidence that such a series would've succeeded though, either.)

Thats all cool. Its subjective and neither of us have evidence about what "would have happened" or why what happened, happened. For me, personally, the Peter Parker character was the key element. But for me, you can't have Spider-Man without Peter Parker present in some way.

You and I both know that she can be a "uniquely positive character" while still having tragedy in her past. And actually, the fact that she DOES have tragedy in her past makes her positive demeanor all the more important and compelling, in my mind. It's easy to be happy when nothing terrible has happened. (Plus, she wasn't without some tragedy in her life already: the death of Crazy 8 weighed on her conscience pretty heavily.)

All of that is true, and you make a great point about Crazy 8. But I think you might agree that the death of one's father has much more sweeping ramifications than the death of one villain. In that sense, its not a real comparison. Peter's death in that universe makes May a permanently tragic character. At least I would hope it does, because if she is still happy-go-lucky then someone is doing some seriously screwy writing.

[boots]

i dunno, man. most of this can be summed up with "welcome to mainstream comics. this is how it has always worked and always will".

I guess you and I disagree on what the meaning of death in comics is-ultimately I figure it's about telling a good story, not (just) upsetting the reader; a good comic book death should make the reader upset the character's gone, but it shouldn't be an end in and of itself. The deaths in Spider-Verse felt more like they were calculated to create outrage rather than serve the story.

hmmm. i think the fact that there are enough of us here who don't feel that way is enough to open it to interpretation, no? and to be honest, i'm pretty sure "to hurt yvonmukluk's feelings" was pretty low on the list of reasons for why slott chose this particular development.

Plus of course, 'dead parent(s)' really isn't that groundbreaking for a teen hero book. Let's see we have Anya, Miles, Peter himself...and that's just Spider-Titles. Killing off a character shouldn't feel like the writer's just ticking off a checklist. Hell, it was BECAUSE May's parents were both happy & healthy that actually set her book apart.

i thought it was because she was a great character.

And no, I don't watch game of thrones, because I ultimately find it too depressing. I don't appreciate pointless death getting dragged into other things I like, especially where it doesn't belong.

which ultimately isn't what the deaths in GoT are (though i'll give you points as far the show is concerned- there are a few gratuitous ones in there). like cormac mccarthy's work- there's a message behind each and every death.

[boots]

All of that is true, and you make a great point about Crazy 8. But I think you might agree that the death of one's father has much more sweeping ramifications than the death of one villain. In that sense, its not a real comparison. Peter's death in that universe makes May a permanently tragic character. At least I would hope it does, because if she is still happy-go-lucky then someone is doing some seriously screwy writing.

really? permanent? i suppose i shouldn't be able to laugh after the tragic death of my own father, but somehow i have.

the death of a parent is something every child eventually faces. somewhere along the time line. i agree it needs to be dealt with, but does it need to forever be an albatross around the neck? no way.

[Pav]

Yvon, there was plenty of thoughts for me to respond to, but I want most to discuss this:

I guess you and I disagree on what the meaning of death in comics is-ultimately I figure it's about telling a good story, not (just) upsetting the reader

This is frustrating. Do you see what you've done here? You've set up a strawman argument - are you familiar with the term? - that automatically puts you in the right and me in the wrong, by (unethically) deciding what my position is for me. Think about the wording you've used here: "You and I disagree... I figure it's about telling a good story." So what are we to assume my position is? That I don't care about good storytelling? Because whether or not you see it, admit it, believe it - that is what your wording implies. And it is supremely frustrating.

I'm not demanding that you change your opinions on the story. You are free to dislike something. I guess all I wanted to impart to you and cmbmool and others with similar mind sets is that there were legitimate reasons for why Dan Slott, professional writer, made the storytelling decisions he did, and that just because you didn't like those decisions does not inherently make them bad decisions.

-Pav, who teaches college Literature classes and cares a great deal about good storytelling...

[Yvonmukluk]

i dunno, man. most of this can be summed up with "welcome to mainstream comics. this is how it has always worked and always will".

So I'm banned from complaining about a cheap story beat that lazy writers keep coming back to? 'This is how it's always been done' is no defense.

hmmm. i think the fact that there are enough of us here who don't feel that way is enough to open it to interpretation, no? and to be honest, i'm pretty sure "to hurt yvonmukluk's feelings" was pretty low on the list of reasons for why slott chose this particular development.

Except they've out and out stated they prefer angry readers. I mean come the hell on-what possible purpose did killing off the Amazing Friends serve in the wider story? It made people angry. The '90s Cartoon/Unlimited (well, they're technically different characters, but nobody told Slott that) Spidey? It made people angry. I mean that and establish the Inheritors were baddies, but I think we knew that already. Hell, technically the MC2 stuff was some of the least objectionable, since it at least factored into the continuing story. But if you don't think that all those examples weren't at least partly designed to deliberately aggravate the reader, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

i thought it was because she was a great character.

Fine, it was PART OF what set her apart from the crowd. Is that better?

which ultimately isn't what the deaths in GoT are (though i'll give you points as far the show is concerned- there are a few gratuitous ones in there). like cormac mccarthy's work- there's a message behind each and every death.

Just because some stories kill off a bunch of characters and are critically acclaimed doesn't mean EVERY story needs to have a body count.

really? permanent? i suppose i shouldn't be able to laugh after the tragic death of my own father, but somehow i have.

the death of a parent is something every child eventually faces. somewhere along the time line. i agree it needs to be dealt with, but does it need to forever be an albatross around the neck? no way.

Yeah, like 616 Peter could get over Uncle Ben's death instead of bringing it up every five minutes. Or you know, he could come to terms with his Aunt finally dying-oh, wait, the first time it wasn't really her and the second he sold his marriage to Satan rather than take responsibility like an adult. If he gets to keep his Aunt around for 50 sodding years, then the justification for killing off Mayday's dad kind of loses a lot of water.

Yvon, there was plenty of thoughts for me to respond to, but I want most to discuss this:
This is frustrating. Do you see what you've done here? You've set up a strawman argument - are you familiar with the term? - that automatically puts you in the right and me in the wrong, by (unethically) deciding what my position is for me. Think about the wording you've used here: "You and I disagree... I figure it's about telling a good story." So what are we to assume my position is? That I don't care about good storytelling? Because whether or not you see it, admit it, believe it - that is what your wording implies. And it is supremely frustrating.

You do realise I was actually responding to Slott, there? Anyway, considering some of his historical writing (the aforementioned killing off of characters in the run-up to Spider-Verse that served little to no narrative purpose except controversy and 'these guys are bad', which was fairly self-evident IMO-unless there was some symbolism to the death of the Amazing Friends I missed), I think I'm justified in saying that he has used the killing off of characters as a means to goad the reader in the past.

And yes I'm familiar with a strawman argument, please don't patronise me.

I'm not demanding that you change your opinions on the story. You are free to dislike something. I guess all I wanted to impart to you and cmbmool and others with similar mind sets is that there were legitimate reasons for why Dan Slott, professional writer, made the storytelling decisions he did, and that just because you didn't like those decisions does not inherently make them bad decisions.

Wait, So I'm not allowed to say I think Slott's creative decisions were bad in my opinion? I didn't realise literary criticism was an objective field.

-Pav, who teaches college Literature classes and cares a great deal about good storytelling...

I'm not sure why you brought that up, but whatever.

[Dataweaver]

It was "Spider-Verse".
Not "Spider-Verse Guest-Starring The MC2".
All due respect, but from your many passionate posts, I think that's the only approach that would've made you happy.
And that's cool.
Everyone's entitled to their favorite characters and corners of the U.

IIRC, a major element of Spider-Verse was that it was going to include “every Spider ever”, or something to that effect, barring only the ones you legally couldn't touch. To the extent that I'm bothered by the fact that you only included May and her immediate family from MC2, that's why. I mean, you went so far as to include the Hostess Spider-Man… To the extent that Peter's death was intended to show how dangerous the Inheritors are, wouldn't that be better served by having him cut through the MC2 Spiders who were still in their prime, instead of just pounding on a has-been?

(Yes, there would have been an outcry from MC2 fans if you had done that — but I'm not taking about what would have satisfied them; only what might have made for a better story. Admittedly, it would have required a full “Edge of Spider-Verse” issue and not just a backup story; but looking over the various “Edge of Spider-Verse” issues, I can think of several that could have taken May’s place as the backup story in order to give May’s Verse more room.)