Loki Appreciation 2018

[Kirsty1996]

Loki’s genderfluidity has already been written well without the need to bring any such mythology in that would be damaging to his character and the story that is being told. There is no need to bring in the myths of his alleged children here because it would just be too regressive for his character and wouldn’t make sense, not to mention as everyone said would be piles and piles of retcons.

Hela has never blatantly been stated to be Loki’s daughter in the comics, at least not in recent years, in fact there’s evidence to suggest she’s not his daughter as all just as there is evidence to suggest she is. It’s ambiguous and that is something I think the comic writers have always been aiming for when it came to Loki’s alleged children especially Hela for it to be an ambiguous prospect of him fathering or mothering these children.

It’s why Tess is the only one, a character not part of the myths, to be confirmed to be his daughter.

I’m not against bringing more mythology in but it mustn’t be too much and it must make sense for the character in hand. If you bring too much in it stops the magic that is comic book Loki, who has always been different in many ways from his mythological self even especially this Loki now, sure you can draw similarities but that is it. This gives the writers who write Loki some free leeway. We wouldn’t have gotten half the stories we have gotten with Loki if his character was based on mythology too much.

[Shura]

I agree with that it would be regresive to take a lot of elements of his past, but some nods to the mythos would be nice if they fit in the story, don´t need recons and don´t block too much potencial for future stories, more like a "yes, that happened", but not re-tell the same stories. For example, Sleipnir being his son, I don´t want to read the story of his birth neither read something about him fathering (or mothering in this case) with his "children", it´s too late for that, but a little nod from time to time would be fine, but not telling an story arounf that fact, just little unnecessary details.

The opposite case is Hela, changing her to being his biologycal daughter would be a nonsense after all this years and the story is fine as it is, btw I remember old comics where Hela said Loki was her Father, and Loki said she was his daughter, but nothing about him raising her, reading those stories I can imagine something like a "Loki, I´m your daughter" and "Tsss, another one? sure whatever..." but there´re tons of old comics that I haven´t read so probably I´ve missed something.

[rpmaluki]

I think regarding Loki's past relationships, Marvel has moved on from that. It's not to say they didn't happen, they did, but they happened to a different Loki/Loki was in a different time and place that needed those relationships, just like Verity is the last female relation we have (outside his family) that helped bring about the god of stories arc. Every wife/relationship served a purpose for the story of its time, so to drudge up everyone he's ever come across does seem like moving backwards, unless then can convincingly write them into the new incarnation of Loki as we know him today (read: Laufey), and I speak as someone who likes Sigyn and would also like to see her again. The same goes for his children. They won't warrant much of a mention because in terms of the narrative, they don't serve a purpose anymore. The difference with Hela is that she's still in play but they've come up with a clever way to keep things interesting between the two, without coming straight out and saying he's her father and she, his daughter. It's ambiguous and that's better than confirmation, which would alter the stories, how they play out, altogether and it generates discussions much better than Sleipner for instance. The story continues, somewhat, between him and Hela (even if we don't see them interact regularly) compared to the done and dusted stories of his other children. The only other person I want to see interacting with Loki is Leah. There's some unfinished business there.

About the TBT The Mighty Thor #6 issue, I have been thinking about how we can have an almost repeat of what King Loki did in that AoA issue with the gold and why he shot a fish with a bazooka. A combination of the past merging with merging with god of stories Loki, ala Quantum Leap. I just don't fancy a normal regular throw back issue, unless Aaron can tie it to the current events, especially with Loki not bound by time and space.

While following this train of thought, I even had a crazier idea of Thor Odinson's disappearance. As far as we know, he's died, but like all Marvel stories except for Uncle Ben's, nobody ever truly stays dead, so what if Thor is trapped in a different timeline unbeknownst to his family and friends, including Loki. Loki is currently strong but we now see, that he's not so omnipresent or even omniscient, it would explain how someone that has the to power to manipulate stories because of his ability to truly understand them doesn't actually know where his brother is and doesn't even know (as far as we know) who's wielding mjolnir. I don't read Thor, or any other comics except SHIELD because I love the tv show, most of my pull list has dwindled to just that book and at least one inhumans book when I am in the mood, I don't read Secret Wars, I skipped all of battleworld except for the books that had Loki in them, so I honestly don't know anything much about what happened to Thor, only that he's gone and nobody knows why/how/when or if he'll ever return (of course he will, but that story won't be told just yet). We've been wondering what Loki's true motive is in playing both sides, I personally think Loki may be looking for his brother while trying to make sure his home isn't destroyed by Malekith and his cohorts, with asgard's hero and protector missing or presumed dead. He's playing Malekith most definitely and I do think he'll help Jane!Thor because it is his best interest to help her but he's not a traditional hero, much less a hero but he does love Asgard so he will help in the only way he knows how, with tricks and schemes. But if Loki has an ultimate goal, I think that would be finding his brother, or least that's what I tell myself deep down. I hope I am right.

[jazzflower92]

I know people say Marvel's mythology is it's own thing, but a lot of people over the years have gotten more and more knowledgeable about Norse mythology to the point they see the Marvel stuff and wonder why they are not using some of these cool material that could really fit into the universe. I don't think his past relations and children hold him down at all, but expand his story as a person.

I like the draw from original mythology because they give out potential storylines and arcs. Not to mention show different sides of the character that was never thought of before. Sure, Marvel can still do their own spin, but it still can be faithful to both the spirit of the original myth and it's own mythology.

Not to mention some of Loki's children could be good allies to Thor like Eisa and Einmyria, who I think would be great superhero characters. I mean with all the unused characters from mythology they could either make good supporting cast or rogue gallery. I mean they are still using Laufey even if some people who see him as being needed to be put in the past.

http://www.northernpaganism.org/shri...-and-eisa.html

[Fanto.mx]

I know people say Marvel's mythology is it's own thing, but a lot of people over the years have gotten more and more knowledgeable about Norse mythology to the point they see the Marvel stuff and wonder why they are not using some of these cool material that could really fit into the universe. I don't think his past relations and children hold him down at all, but expand his story as a person.

I like the draw from original mythology because they give out potential storylines and arcs. Not to mention show different sides of the character that was never thought of before. Sure, Marvel can still do their own spin, but it still can be faithful to both the spirit of the original myth and it's own mythology.

Not to mention some of Loki's children could be good allies to Thor like Eisa and Einmyria, who I think would be great superhero characters. I mean with all the unused characters from mythology they could either make good supporting cast or rogue gallery. I mean they are still using Laufey even if some people who see him as being needed to be put in the past.

http://www.northernpaganism.org/shri...-and-eisa.html

Okay. So here's just one example of why this would only serve to make the Marvel Asgard needlessly complex and would be waaaay more trouble than its virtually no benefit would be worth:

Ullr / Uller. You'd have to dig him up after having not made an appearance in 30 years and only 3 appearances in the last 50, then explain how the only real story featuring him, which included Loki and Thor as boys and Uller as an adult, fits with him being the son of Odin and Sif, even though Sif is pretty clearly a contemporary of Thor and Loki. And then you have to deal with Thor having been in a relationship with someone who is the mother of another of his half-brothers.

That's the sort of thing you're asking for.

[Kirsty1996]

I know people say Marvel's mythology is it's own thing, but a lot of people over the years have gotten more and more knowledgeable about Norse mythology to the point they see the Marvel stuff and wonder why they are not using some of these cool material that could really fit into the universe.

That maybe the case and yes there are some interesting stories surrounding the Norse gods and it’s mythology and yes some want to see those stories but those stories would not work in the Marvel Universe as it would take a lot away from it.

The great thing about these Marvel characters like Thor and Loki etc. is that they have their own rich History in Marvel that differs greatly from the Myths except some nods here and there. This also gives the writers of the comics more leeway with the characters.

It would, it would bring his character down big time not to mention it just wouldn’t make sense either. As everyone said Loki is looking forward not backwards also he has been forming new relationships. Loki has not had any relationships with his “children” and nor has he ever hinted he wants to. I think Loki has well and truly moved on from that part of his past.

Past relationships that was never part of this Loki’s story wouldn’t expand his character but would truly regress his character especially as the God of stories who sees his own story a new chapter of Loki. Those children belong to chapter from Original Loki and that chapter is closed as it should be not opened.

Loki’s character can expanded by bringing new characters and relationships into play like his new relationship with his brother and Jane, not by bringing characters from a past that is long gone.

No it really can’t. You can either follow the myths or follow comic myths, you can’t do both. If you do too much mythology it will take away massively from what the comic world is with these characters.

They can still add these characters in but they don’t need to make them Loki’s children. The great thing about Marvel not following Mythology to a T is so they can bring these characters from the myths in at any time and write their own twist with these said characters.

Loki is a very rich and enticing character you shouldn’t bring the Loki from myths in and ruin all that. That’s just bringing mythology in for the sake of bringing mythology in not for the sake of the character who is already awesome and will continue to be.

It's alright to add mytholgy but don't go overboard because as I said it just takes away from the Marvel U and the character we know as Loki

[jazzflower92]

Okay. So here's just one example of why this would only serve to make the Marvel Asgard needlessly complex and would be waaaay more trouble than its virtually no benefit would be worth:

Ullr / Uller. You'd have to dig him up after having not made an appearance in 30 years and only 3 appearances in the last 50, then explain how the only real story featuring him, which included Loki and Thor as boys and Uller as an adult, fits with him being the son of Odin and Sif, even though Sif is pretty clearly a contemporary of Thor and Loki. And then you have to deal with Thor having been in a relationship with someone who is the mother of another of his half-brothers.

That's the sort of thing you're asking for.

Actually Ullir's father in mythology was an unknown Frost giant.

I know that not everything will be 100% true to mythology. However, it's just fun to see how Marvel does it's own take on the concept and how it pans out. I think you can bring in mythology for the sake of character and worldbuilding. I do say if you wander off too far from mythology then it becomes only in name.

One interesting thing is that while Freyja was willing the Midgard Serpent she acknowledged him as being her grandson. So, it seems some writers are not making it as ambiguous as a lot of people are saying.

I am just wondering why people regard characters like Sigyn, Angrboda, and his children as being in the past. When you can say the same thing about his relationship with Thor. I don't think they should just be left in the past, but have a new relationship with Loki like he has done with his brother. His children shouldn't be considered a part of his past, but his family as much as his brother. I know you can consider past relationships part of the past, but children are different and parents shouldn't consider their children expendable or easily thrown away. Isn't that what Loki was fighting against which is being seen as the child that is easily thrown to the side? Well, it would be seen as hypocritical if his own children were treated like that. Heck, Loki could have a story where he reflects on his own parenting skills and shows how sometimes he is not so different from Loki and Freyja.

[Riimi]

About the TBT The Mighty Thor #6 issue, I have been thinking about how we can have an almost repeat of what King Loki did in that AoA issue with the gold and why he shot a fish with a bazooka. A combination of the past merging with merging with god of stories Loki, ala Quantum Leap. I just don't fancy a normal regular throw back issue, unless Aaron can tie it to the current events, especially with Loki not bound by time and space.

While following this train of thought, I even had a crazier idea of Thor Odinson's disappearance. As far as we know, he's died, but like all Marvel stories except for Uncle Ben's, nobody ever truly stays dead, so what if Thor is trapped in a different timeline unbeknownst to his family and friends, including Loki. Loki is currently strong but we now see, that he's not so omnipresent or even omniscient, it would explain how someone that has the to power to manipulate stories because of his ability to truly understand them doesn't actually know where his brother is and doesn't even know (as far as we know) who's wielding mjolnir. I don't read Thor, or any other comics except SHIELD because I love the tv show, most of my pull list has dwindled to just that book and at least one inhumans book when I am in the mood, I don't read Secret Wars, I skipped all of battleworld except for the books that had Loki in them, so I honestly don't know anything much about what happened to Thor, only that he's gone and nobody knows why/how/when or if he'll ever return (of course he will, but that story won't be told just yet). We've been wondering what Loki's true motive is in playing both sides, I personally think Loki may be looking for his brother while trying to make sure his home isn't destroyed by Malekith and his cohorts, with asgard's hero and protector missing or presumed dead. He's playing Malekith most definitely and I do think he'll help Jane!Thor because it is his best interest to help her but he's not a traditional hero, much less a hero but he does love Asgard so he will help in the only way he knows how, with tricks and schemes. But if Loki has an ultimate goal, I think that would be finding his brother, or least that's what I tell myself deep down. I hope I am right.

I was wondering something similar about the flashback issue, myself. It doesn't make sense to the narrative to have an isolated flashback, but it builds upon the Loki/Thor conflict that was mentioned last isuse (their story, as it were), which makes me think that's going to be something that Jason Aaron explores more in depth (and he's shown that he likes an overarching mythological narrative). Now, I wasn't originally thinking that it was Loki necessarily travelling back in time, at first --though he could--but even if he doesn't, the story helps to anchor that narrative. Reminds me a lot of the three part arc Aaron did with past, present and future Thor. It demands some sort of closure by resonance as well as common storytelling motif (rule of three). And, although I think he's also going to explore the conflict between this Thor and Loki, extending it beyond that scope paints it as a distinct instance in the overarching mythology that still needs to ultimately be settled with his brother. (Although I definitely admit my own preferences are biasing my analysis, I also swear that this makes an intuitive sense to me that I'm having trouble conveying--I guess it basically boils down to: it started with his brother, by symmetry it ought to end with him).

Random intrusion on my own thoughts (also, this is much more to do with Jane than Loki): saying that it was a distinct instance made me realize that's how Jane's tenure as Thor kinda feels, even in the comic itself. We all know Thor Odinson will eventually become worthy again -- even if we didn't see future version of him who had regained the hammer, that's how the story (comics) work. Lady!Loki lampshades it last issue. Everyone "knows" that her tenure as Thor is just an aberration that will eventually resolve itself. Even if we didn't know it from a story perspective, she's literally dying of cancer. It's...actually very tragic even if it makes me expect it will be subverted somehow because of the strength of human tenacity in a battle more or less against fate.

Huh. Now I do kinda wish Jane and Loki could just sit down and have a non-violent conversation, he could relate with that. Although I feel that it's more likely from a meta-perspective that Loki's a stand in for a more nuanced fan of the original Thor, one with emotional investment in the character who just wants him back. Odin, on the other hand, seemed more just angry that someone had messed with his toys(inability to lift Mjolnir) and challenged his supremacy, rather than legitimately concerned for his son. It's...a weird world we live in?

[Kirsty1996]

Not really, how it will pan out is that it will ignore the Marvel mythology, the mythology they have built for these characters that would be how the concept plays out. It would just ruin everything.

No they have made it ambiguous.

You can’t compare Loki’s relationship and how that moved forward to that of his non-existing relationship with his maybe children. Loki’s relationship with Thor moved forwards, it didn’t just become new, it was also a change that was slow and not something done out of the blue like it would be here.

No Loki is not fighting for that. He’s not fighting because he was thrown to the side or was ignored. That’s more what original Loki was fighting. This Loki is fighting for something completely different. He’s fighting to be who he wants to be, to not care what others think of him and not letting them change him from what he doesn’t want. He doesn’t want to be original Loki, he doesn’t want to be king Loki, hell he doesn’t want to be Kid Loki, he wants to be Loki, himself, not another version of him.

If they want to show Loki’s parental skills they can make him have a new lover and have a new baby. Leave the past alone. Let this Loki have new stories, let him be his own character.

I will say I wouldn't mind seeing how Marvel handles the mythology but I think that story should be non-canon rather than trying to incorporate it into canon.

[Raye]

The opposite case is Hela, changing her to being his biologycal daughter would be a nonsense after all this years and the story is fine as it is, btw I remember old comics where Hela said Loki was her Father, and Loki said she was his daughter, but nothing about him raising her, reading those stories I can imagine something like a "Loki, I´m your daughter" and "Tsss, another one? sure whatever..." but there´re tons of old comics that I haven´t read so probably I´ve missed something.

With Hela, I think what likely happened was that somewhere along the line, they put some things in there about her being his daughter because myths without really thinking it through. then later, they realized that made NO sense at all in Marvel continuity, Loki's supposed daughter was older than he was. So they quietly swept it under the rug and just didn't mention it, until Gillen found a way to smooth things over.

While following this train of thought, I even had a crazier idea of Thor Odinson's disappearance. As far as we know, he's died, but like all Marvel stories except for Uncle Ben's, nobody ever truly stays dead, so what if Thor is trapped in a different timeline unbeknownst to his family and friends, including Loki. Loki is currently strong but we now see, that he's not so omnipresent or even omniscient, it would explain how someone that has the to power to manipulate stories because of his ability to truly understand them doesn't actually know where his brother is and doesn't even know (as far as we know) who's wielding mjolnir. I don't read Thor, or any other comics except SHIELD because I love the tv show, most of my pull list has dwindled to just that book and at least one inhumans book when I am in the mood, I don't read Secret Wars, I skipped all of battleworld except for the books that had Loki in them, so I honestly don't know anything much about what happened to Thor, only that he's gone and nobody knows why/how/when or if he'll ever return (of course he will, but that story won't be told just yet). We've been wondering what Loki's true motive is in playing both sides, I personally think Loki may be looking for his brother while trying to make sure his home isn't destroyed by Malekith and his cohorts, with asgard's hero and protector missing or presumed dead. He's playing Malekith most definitely and I do think he'll help Jane!Thor because it is his best interest to help her but he's not a traditional hero, much less a hero but he does love Asgard so he will help in the only way he knows how, with tricks and schemes. But if Loki has an ultimate goal, I think that would be finding his brother, or least that's what I tell myself deep down. I hope I am right.

I am pretty sure what Loki is doing does have something to do with Thor (as in, his brother), and he obviously does not want Asgard destroyed. Even when Loki was in full blown villain mode, he wanted to rule Asgard, not destroy it. Still not really sure how it will all fit together though.

I know people say Marvel's mythology is it's own thing, but a lot of people over the years have gotten more and more knowledgeable about Norse mythology to the point they see the Marvel stuff and wonder why they are not using some of these cool material that could really fit into the universe. I don't think his past relations and children hold him down at all, but expand his story as a person.

I like the draw from original mythology because they give out potential storylines and arcs. Not to mention show different sides of the character that was never thought of before. Sure, Marvel can still do their own spin, but it still can be faithful to both the spirit of the original myth and it's own mythology.

Not to mention some of Loki's children could be good allies to Thor like Eisa and Einmyria, who I think would be great superhero characters. I mean with all the unused characters from mythology they could either make good supporting cast or rogue gallery. I mean they are still using Laufey even if some people who see him as being needed to be put in the past.

http://www.northernpaganism.org/shri...-and-eisa.html

Here's the thing. The Marvel Universe is not like our world. No one is going around saying we need to make the MU's history fit more closely with our own, because then it's not the MU any more. While it is similar enough to our world that we can definitely tell it's meant to be our world with some tweaks and on the surface looks very similar, many things in the MU's past are different. Atlantis is real and filled with people, people were making sophisticated androids in the 40's, Celestials and the Kree tampered with people in the distant past, giving rise to superpowers now, there are entire fictional countries like Wakanda inserted into the MU's geography, and on and on. If all that is different, why shouldn't the MU's version of the Norse (and Greek and Egyptian etc.) myths be different as well?

As for Laufey, not the same thing. First of all, their take on Laufey does not match the myths. Laufey was Loki's MOTHER, not his father, just to start. And he was already an existing character and had been used within the past 10 years in 2 different runs before Aaron ever resurrected him, so no retcons are needed to use Laufey, him being Loki's father was established long ago. AND, presumably, Aaron is using him for a purpose that relates to Loki NOW. To show us how he feels about his past and his family right now, after all the changes he's been through. Aaron also needed someone to lead the Giants anyway, so hey, may as well. This is what I meant when I said it would be fine to use myth stuff if it fit the story and did not contradict already established Marvel continuity. This does that.

Actually Ullir's father in mythology was an unknown Frost giant.

I know that not everything will be 100% true to mythology. However, it's just fun to see how Marvel does it's own take on the concept and how it pans out. I think you can bring in mythology for the sake of character and worldbuilding. I do say if you wander off too far from mythology then it becomes only in name.

One interesting thing is that while Freyja was willing the Midgard Serpent she acknowledged him as being her grandson. So, it seems some writers are not making it as ambiguous as a lot of people are saying.

I am just wondering why people regard characters like Sigyn, Angrboda, and his children as being in the past. When you can say the same thing about his relationship with Thor. I don't think they should just be left in the past, but have a new relationship with Loki like he has done with his brother. His children shouldn't be considered a part of his past, but his family as much as his brother. I know you can consider past relationships part of the past, but children are different and parents shouldn't consider their children expendable or easily thrown away. Isn't that what Loki was fighting against which is being seen as the child that is easily thrown to the side? Well, it would be seen as hypocritical if his own children were treated like that. Heck, Loki could have a story where he reflects on his own parenting skills and shows how sometimes he is not so different from Loki and Freyja.

Because they ARE in his past. THOUSANDS of years in the past in the case of Angrboda. He has never been shown to give a second thought to Angrboda, like, EVER, so why should he start now? And since Sigyn fell into limbo years ago he has likewise not been shown to give her much thought at all. He has moved on. Thor, on the other hand, he has maintained a constant relationship with, even if a lot of that time it has been in an antagonistic role. So while Thor was important in his past, they have maintained the relationship so they are also important to each other NOW. Also, they are brothers. That goes deeper than any romantic relationship Loki's had with Angrboda or anyone else. You can stop being someone's lover, or spouse, or friend. You don't ever stop being someone's sibling.

[Raye]

new post cus i hit the character limit:

I was wondering something similar about the flashback issue, myself. It doesn't make sense to the narrative to have an isolated flashback, but it builds upon the Loki/Thor conflict that was mentioned last isuse (their story, as it were), which makes me think that's going to be something that Jason Aaron explores more in depth (and he's shown that he likes an overarching mythological narrative). Now, I wasn't originally thinking that it was Loki necessarily travelling back in time, at first --though he could--but even if he doesn't, the story helps to anchor that narrative. Reminds me a lot of the three part arc Aaron did with past, present and future Thor. It demands some sort of closure by resonance as well as common storytelling motif (rule of three). And, although I think he's also going to explore the conflict between this Thor and Loki, extending it beyond that scope paints it as a distinct instance in the overarching mythology that still needs to ultimately be settled with his brother. (Although I definitely admit my own preferences are biasing my analysis, I also swear that this makes an intuitive sense to me that I'm having trouble conveying--I guess it basically boils down to: it started with his brother, by symmetry it ought to end with him).

Random intrusion on my own thoughts (also, this is much more to do with Jane than Loki): saying that it was a distinct instance made me realize that's how Jane's tenure as Thor kinda feels, even in the comic itself. We all know Thor Odinson will eventually become worthy again -- even if we didn't see future version of him who had regained the hammer, that's how the story (comics) work. Lady!Loki lampshades it last issue. Everyone "knows" that her tenure as Thor is just an aberration that will eventually resolve itself. Even if we didn't know it from a story perspective, she's literally dying of cancer. It's...actually very tragic even if it makes me expect it will be subverted somehow because of the strength of human tenacity in a battle more or less against fate.

Huh. Now I do kinda wish Jane and Loki could just sit down and have a non-violent conversation, he could relate with that. Although I feel that it's more likely from a meta-perspective that Loki's a stand in for a more nuanced fan of the original Thor, one with emotional investment in the character who just wants him back. Odin, on the other hand, seemed more just angry that someone had messed with his toys(inability to lift Mjolnir) and challenged his supremacy, rather than legitimately concerned for his son. It's...a weird world we live in?

That's an interesting observation, actually. One I had not considered. And thinking on it further, Loki and I think most of his fans have embraced his change and don't want him to regress to his old ways. There are exceptions, but mostly, this change to his character has been kinda remarkably well received. The whole point was that he has to fight this pull to revert to his old self and that it is a good thing that he has so far won against that. Yet that's exactly what everyone is assuming will happen with Thor, what most people are HOPING will happen both in and out of the story, including Loki, I assume. We all just assume he's going to be worthy again, and Jane is just treading water until then. We're all a bunch of hypocrites. Loki is allowed to change, but Thor isn't for some reason. Of course, part of that is that Loki pulled himself up and made himself a better person, while Thor has fallen somewhat. I don't think Thor has become a bad person, but still, he lost something, we want him to get it back. But I think he could learn something from his brother right now. Changing who you are doesn't mean it's the end, you can still move forward in a different direction. I think that Thor became so wrapped up in the symbol he had become that he just doesn't know what to do if that is taken away. He's more of an idea than a person, he needs to learn who he is at his core without the whole myth surrounding him getting in the way.

[jazzflower92]

With Hela, I think what likely happened was that somewhere along the line, they put some things in there about her being his daughter because myths without really thinking it through. then later, they realized that made NO sense at all in Marvel continuity, Loki's supposed daughter was older than he was. So they quietly swept it under the rug and just didn't mention it, until Gillen found a way to smooth things over.



I am pretty sure what Loki is doing does have something to do with Thor (as in, his brother), and he obviously does not want Asgard destroyed. Even when Loki was in full blown villain mode, he wanted to rule Asgard, not destroy it. Still not really sure how it will all fit together though.



Here's the thing. The Marvel Universe is not like our world. No one is going around saying we need to make the MU's history fit more closely with our own, because then it's not the MU any more. While it is similar enough to our world that we can definitely tell it's meant to be our world with some tweaks and on the surface looks very similar, many things in the MU's past are different. Atlantis is real and filled with people, people were making sophisticated androids in the 40's, Celestials and the Kree tampered with people in the distant past, giving rise to superpowers now, there are entire fictional countries like Wakanda inserted into the MU's geography, and on and on. If all that is different, why shouldn't the MU's version of the Norse (and Greek and Egyptian etc.) myths be different as well?

As for Laufey, not the same thing. First of all, their take on Laufey does not match the myths. Laufey was Loki's MOTHER, not his father, just to start. And he was already an existing character and had been used within the past 10 years in 2 different runs before Aaron ever resurrected him, so no retcons are needed to use Laufey, him being Loki's father was established long ago. AND, presumably, Aaron is using him for a purpose that relates to Loki NOW. To show us how he feels about his past and his family right now, after all the changes he's been through. Aaron also needed someone to lead the Giants anyway, so hey, may as well. This is what I meant when I said it would be fine to use myth stuff if it fit the story and did not contradict already established Marvel continuity. This does that.



Because they ARE in his past. THOUSANDS of years in the past in the case of Angrboda. He has never been shown to give a second thought to Angrboda, like, EVER, so why should he start now? And since Sigyn fell into limbo years ago he has likewise not been shown to give her much thought at all. He has moved on. Thor, on the other hand, he has maintained a constant relationship with, even if a lot of that time it has been in an antagonistic role. So while Thor was important in his past, they have maintained the relationship so they are also important to each other NOW. Also, they are brothers. That goes deeper than any romantic relationship Loki's had with Angrboda or anyone else. You can stop being someone's lover, or spouse, or friend. You don't ever stop being someone's sibling.

Until now we didn't know that Angela existed, and now she's got her own titled book. We never before had any indication that there existed a Tenth Dimension until a writer brought them up. Ultimately these characters are at the will of what the writer wants them to be-even if sometimes the way they writer a character is absolutely stupid or just pure character derailment.

[Raye]

Yeah, so? Marvel tries new characters and ideas out all the time. Sometimes they're good, sometimes not so much, just how it goes. But all those ideas usually start with a story, not just trying to fit characters into things. Angela is an exception, that was a messy situation where Marvel acquired the character from Image and had to figure out a way to fit her in somehow, they were kind of obligated to use her. The same does not hold true for characters from the myths that have not seen much if any use, they can be used or not at Marvel's leisure. If some writer out there has an idea for a story that includes them, I am not against it as long as it does not come across as regressive or undo anything done in the books previously. I just don't want them to be included just to make the comics match the myths, that is not a story, it's continuity padding. There is a lot of things going on in Thor right now, and I can't see how it would fit that into what is being done right now, especially after Loki's recent changes where he is actively trying to distance himself from his past. He just is not in a place where he would seek contact from any ex-lovers. I am just taking a story first attitude, not just doing myth stuff to make the myths and comics match because reasons.

[jazzflower92]

Yeah, so? Marvel tries new characters and ideas out all the time. Sometimes they're good, sometimes not so much, just how it goes. But all those ideas usually start with a story, not just trying to fit characters into things. Angela is an exception, that was a messy situation where Marvel acquired the character from Image and had to figure out a way to fit her in somehow, they were kind of obligated to use her. The same does not hold true for characters from the myths that have not seen much if any use, they can be used or not at Marvel's leisure. If some writer out there has an idea for a story that includes them, I am not against it as long as it does not come across as regressive or undo anything done in the books previously. I just don't want them to be included just to make the comics match the myths, that is not a story, it's continuity padding. There is a lot of things going on in Thor right now, and I can't see how it would fit that into what is being done right now, especially after Loki's recent changes where he is actively trying to distance himself from his past. He just is not in a place where he would seek contact from any ex-lovers. I am just taking a story first attitude, not just doing myth stuff to make the myths and comics match because reasons.

I think instead of him seeking his old lovers. I think it would be his ex-lovers seeking him out. He might want to put his past behind him, but sometimes people from the past don't want to be shoved away.

I mean if they can explain the ambiguous nature of Hela. I think they could explain where the heck Angrboda has been. For some reason I could see her being like Cul, which is a being who is imprisoned outside of the Ragnarok cycle and people have scant memory of. I could see that either Odin or Frigga/Freyja would have put Angrboda outside of the Ragnarok cycle and slowly hoped people overtime would forget about her. I could see Cul finding Angrboda and bring her back as an ally to himself so that he can harness her hatred for Odin and/or Freyja for his own purposes.

[Raye]

I think instead of him seeking his old lovers. I think it would be his ex-lovers seeking him out. He might want to put his past behind him, but sometimes people from the past don't want to be shoved away.

I mean if they can explain the ambiguous nature of Hela. I think they could explain where the heck Angrboda has been. For some reason I could see her being like Cul, which is a being who is imprisoned outside of the Ragnarok cycle and people have scant memory of. I could see that either Odin or Frigga/Freyja would have put Angrboda outside of the Ragnarok cycle and slowly hoped people overtime would forget about her. I could see Cul finding Angrboda and bring her back as an ally to himself so that he can harness her hatred for Odin and/or Freyja for his own purposes.

oh I'm sure they could if it ever came up. There just isn't any real reason to right now. that's all I'm saying, these things need a REASON to be included. As i said when this whole thing began, I actually would not mind seeing Sigyn again as long as Loki was not in a relationship with her, more that she had gotten resurrected at the end of Agent of Asgard and she came to him, and it was just to create an awkward situation for him. But for me, that situation comes from making Loki uncomfortable first, including Sigyn second. Decide on a situation you want to create, then look for the best means/characters to go about that. You seem to be coming at things from the other direction, which is what i have a problem with.