Why can't Marvel make up their mind on Loki?

[William300]

So, Loki has gone back and fourth on the morality scale for a while now. He started as villain, then in latter years he became more of a grey character even sacrificing himself to save Asgard during Siege, then he was reincarnated as the heroic Kid Loki, and then he became villain again with Kid Loki murdering his counterpart that would have genuinely good, and then he once again tries his hand in redemption by trying to erase his evil counterpart from the future. Does anyone else wish Marvel would make up their minds on whether or not Loki is redeemable? I know manipulation is his best weapon but I feel that his morality bouncing back and forth has gotten a bit ridiculous. What do you think? Should Marvel make up their minds on whether or not Loki is redeemable?

[Ambaryerno]

So, Loki has gone back and fourth on the morality scale for a while now. He started as villain, then in latter years he became more of a grey character even sacrificing himself to save Asgard during Siege, then he was reincarnated as the heroic Kid Loki, and then he became villain again with Kid Loki murdering his counterpart that would have genuinely good, and then he once again tries his hand in redemption by trying to erase his evil counterpart from the future. Does anyone else wish Marvel would make up their minds on whether or not Loki is redeemable? I know manipulation is his best weapon but I feel that his morality bouncing back and forth has gotten a bit ridiculous. What do you think? Should Marvel make up their minds on whether or not Loki is redeemable?

Maybe you should ask the Norse. They couldn't seem to decide whether Loki was a friend or enemy of the Gods, either.

[itspopularnowitsucks]

It's the circular character development suffered also by other characters like that scientist dude who beat Loki with a trapdoor in Avengers #1.

I like that Al Ewing pointed this out as sort of metatext in Loki Agent of Asgard, and gave him a new status quo.

[Tiamatty]

Because he's more interesting when there's a strong sense of tension in regards to which way he'll go.

What's going on here is that Loki has gone from a villain to a hero. That happens all the time. The difference in this case is that Loki is being used to explore the very nature of stories. Ever since Kid Loki first showed up, there's been a feeling that he'll become evil old bastard Loki again eventually. We, as readers, have seen this sort of thing before, and we know things always revert to the status quo. So Gillen and Ewing ran with that, by having Loki himself worry about reverting to the status quo, and other characters expecting it of him, because that's just how the stories always go, and Loki is now a creature of stories. Even before Ewing made him God of Stories, Gillen set up the idea of the power of stories, especially over gods.

It still remains to be seen which way Marvel goes with Loki. Young Hero Loki? Old Evil Loki? Both at once? That last is what we have now, and they may decide to keep it that way for a while, maybe even make it more or less permanent. But finding out which way Loki will go has become the point of the character. He's no longer just "I'm evil and want power or vengeance or both depending on how I feel at any given moment!" But neither is he "I'm a hero and I want to help people!" Now, he's "What am I and what am I going to be?" Which also happens to be a pretty nice reflection of life - we're all finding out who we are, whether we can outgrow our pasts, afraid of our futures, wondering whether we can really change or if we're doomed to become what we're fated to be, and all that fun stuff.

[MouserGrey]

Loki was a trickster god of the Norse. Trickster gods are hard to put a finger on as far as morality goes. Their purpose is essentially to break rules. Usually for the benefit of mankind. Loki was a bit more edgy than the trickster gods of other pantheons. He eventually became the enemy of the Norse gods. He started out as Odin's blood brother and went on several adventures with him and other gods. He often helped the gods out of fixes they got themselves into. Some, of course we're fixes he got them into in the first place. Loki is in a round about way responsible for the dwarves fashioning the gods most powerful weapons including Odin's spear and Mjolner.
So if Marvel can't make up their mind on him is really just an exploration of the original character they based him on. Which I s cool. Cuz when I started reading comics he was pretty ugh full on evil.

[dragonmp93]

Well, that's kind of the point of Loki ?, isnt it ?......................

[Flash Gordon]

He's a god, their sense of "morality" is very fluid. Hell, their sense of self is very fluid. Look at the actual Norse myths, Loki was just as sexually fluid and morally grey as he is in the comics.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

I miss female Loki. She was hawt!

[Raye]

Oh, they have made up their minds. It's just that they've decided on chaotic neutral so he doesn't fit neatly in either a 'hero' or 'villain' category. Ever since Kid Loki died, it is very hard to pin a strict hero or villain label on him, and that's frankly the way it should be. As others have said, in the original mythology he was a trickster god, not an evil one. Neither good nor evil, but capable of going either way depending on circumstances. He is unpredictable and can help you one day and stab you in the back the next, pure chaotic neutral. (mostly type 4, with a bit of 1)

[t hedge coke]

It's sort of the point of Loki, isn't it?

Even outside the real world scope of religious or mythical Loki and focusing on Marvel, it's sort of like wanting Thor to just finally learn humility and patience or Spider-Man to one day completely embrace how awesome his life is and just spend every issue in bed with his wife except Tuesday night, when they have dinner with Aunt May.

[Panic]

Oh, they have made up their minds. It's just that they've decided on chaotic neutral so he doesn't fit neatly in either a 'hero' or 'villain' category. Ever since Kid Loki died, it is very hard to pin a strict hero or villain label on him, and that's frankly the way it should be. As others have said, in the original mythology he was a trickster god, not an evil one. Neither good nor evil, but capable of going either way depending on circumstances. He is unpredictable and can help you one day and stab you in the back the next, pure chaotic neutral. (mostly type 4, with a bit of 1)

I don't think that's really true. From what I remember, he starts out good, but gradually becomes more malicious in action until he is finally and unreservedly the enemy of the gods. At least that's how my copy of Roger Lancelyn Green's Myths of the Norsemen told the story. I do have translations of the Eddas around, but I've yet to read them all.

[DrNewGod]

Same issue with Magneto. Once a character is cool enough, TPTB can't resist trying to make money off of them in a series. And of course, we can't have an out-and-out villain headlining a series. Whether or not that is appropriate for the character, is entirely beside the point.

[Tiamatty]

Same issue with Magneto. Once a character is cool enough, TPTB can't resist trying to make money off of them in a series. And of course, we can't have an out-and-out villain headlining a series. Whether or not that is appropriate for the character, is entirely beside the point.

Well, you can blame Claremont for Magneto getting some heroic traits. Though it's worth pointing out that his current series does have him as basically an old terrorist bastard. He's hunting people who hurt mutants, but he's still far from heroic.

[The Fury]

Yeah... he's a bit tricky.

[Lutecius]

Same issue with Magneto.

Same with Mystique.

As for Loki, I don't really mind since the non-evil Lokis we've had in the last few years were essentially different incarnations. The "story in the story" shtick does get tiresome, though. We get it. No need to mention it every issue.