Clone Comspiracy #3 spoilers and discussion

[Prof. Warren]

Ooookkaaayy. I did not expect this much hate. Guess I'll be the unpopular one: I loved it. There.

Didn't expect "this much hate" on message boards? Hahaha!

The funny thing is, most of the hate towards comics is always about where people assume a story is going.

We just found out that Ben's back. You'd think people would wait a bit and have a few questions answered before assuming that he's a full-on villain or whatever else is pissing them off. But that's fandom for you.

[boots]

Didn't expect "this much hate" on message boards? Hahaha!

The funny thing is, most of the hate towards comics is always about where people assume a story is going.

We just found out that Ben's back. You'd think people would wait a bit and have a few questions answered before assuming that he's a full-on villain or whatever else is pissing them off. But that's fandom for you.

the confirmation bias is powerful

[Prof. Warren]

my reading of that was that he couldn't see the actual battle? he just knew that ock was fighting to regain control of "his body".

Yes, he couldn't see the actual battle. I don't have the issue close at hand but I believe he even says something to the effect of "I don't know what was going on in there" to Ock after the "battle" is over.

[rward777]

the confirmation bias is powerful

This is even more twisted than Doc Ock becoming Spider-Man.

[boots]

This is even more twisted than Doc Ock becoming Spider-Man.

...my sentence? it didn't think it was that depraved

[Vegeta]

Exactly. It's completely valid to see his actions as heroic and well intended - or at least not villainous.

I dunno, the fact that "Ben Reilly" goes out of his way to apprehend anyone who stumbles upon his operation (Sicking his army of resurrected villains on Peter and Gwen) or sending his new Electro after Prowler (who promptly murders him) seems to imply some knowledge of wrongdoing.

[Phantom Roxas]

This comment makes zero sense. If you read this and your take away was that Ben was a "creepy sexual perv", I think you read an issue that only exists in your imagination.

Oh stop it. Enough with the idea that a comic somehow only exists in someone else's imagination. You can disagree with The BaRoN's interpretation, but don't go so far as to claim that their reading is ~imaginary~, as if your reading is somehow the only "real" one. Their interpretation is no less valid than yours.

[boots]

Oh stop it. Enough with the idea that a comic somehow only exists in someone else's imagination. You can disagree with The BaRoN's interpretation, but don't go so far as to claim that their reading is ~imaginary~, as if your reading is somehow the only "real" one. Their interpretation is no less valid than yours.

that's true to a point. any interpretation is valid if it can be backed by the text. the baron's is less valid because there doesn't seem to be any support for it, other than personal vitriol.

the baron doesn't seem to be interested in explaining how s/he came to that conclusion. so i think it's forgiveable that prof warren thinks the baron plucked it out of thin air. even that info wars guy at least provided his own highly amusing reasoning for why he thinks hillary clinton is a literal demon.

if my interpretation is that the jackal is really a care bear who is only creating clones so he can somehow get his hands on excalibur and/or he-man's sword of power, then people have the right to wonder wtf when i float my "interpretation" on the internet. much like people who see sexual tension between spider-man and she hulk.

[Xenon]

"Jackal" used both terms. He called it a "psychic imprint" in ASM #20 and "psychic residue" in Clone Conspiracy #2. Basically, all he's saying is that he uploaded whatever trace elements of a person's memory were left behind after their death. Which, if you think about it, doesn't make those the actual memories/soul/consciousness of the deceased.

As for Doc Ock, that's different because he downloaded his own mind from one of his octobots directly into his own clone. If he hadn't, his clone would've had the memories and personality of Peter Parker. Basically, it's to show that, unlike the other New U clones, Doc Ock isn't considered by the others as a clone despite his body having been cloned (and, if you really want to get technical, his own mind is a digital copy of a digital copy of digital copy of his original mind).

For some reason I want to watch Multiplicity after that.....

[berserkerclaw]

Well i was wrong. i really thought he was Warren. Warren probably did bring Ben back though. and i knee they would get to uncle Ben soon. hes on the teaser after all. for me though leave Uncle Ben alone he needs to atay dead just like Gwen. and i wasnt before but im switching to the camp who wants a writer change. No hate towards Slott i like him but wanna see what can be done by someone else

[Phantom Roxas]

much like people who see sexual tension between spider-man and she hulk.

Pffffffft, nice. Fair point, it's just… "this issue only exists in your imagination" is a bit dismissive. If Warren had just asked "Where did you get this from?", that could be inviting Baron to point to the text, and you're right, that would have helped reinforce Baron's interpretation. Then again, my experience is that even when you do point to creep sexual behavior in Slott's writing, people will jump through hoops to insist that it's totally not there, so I worry that even if Baron backed up their point, they still would have been accused of "imagining" the comic.

Claiming it's only their imagination also seems like an excuse, which I'm a bit wary about. I agree that people could reach to find things to hate in a variety of media, and twist things to suit their narrative, but I'd rather not try to apply that assumption here. The reaction of "Your interpretation is different than mine, and the only possible explanation for this is that you imagined a completely different comic!" deflects any and all criticism of the story, which I think is just as bad as those people who have to reach to find things to hate. If someone is going to go to too far of an effort to criticize a story, then it's also possible for someone to go too far to defend a story. Though it's not really a defense of the story if the only thing you can do is accuse the critic of being delusional.

[boots]

Pffffffft, nice. Fair point, it's just… "this issue only exists in your imagination" is a bit dismissive. If Warren had just asked "Where did you get this from?", that could be inviting Baron to point to the text, and you're right, that would have helped reinforce Baron's interpretation.

i asked the baron for clarification, which was dodged. i think probalus also called the baron out. that's the baron's choice to ignore of course, but it doesn't help his/her point.

and that's assuming the point was anything beyond pouring boiling tar. which i strongly doubt.

Then again, my experience is that even when you do point to creep sexual behavior in Slott's writing, people will jump through hoops to insist that it's totally not there, so I worry that even if Baron backed up their point, they still would have been accused of "imagining" the comic.

i haven't noticed any sexual creepiness from slott, but i've only read spider-verse and cc so far.

the big difference is that you tend to go to the effort to show how you reach your conclusions. which then allows others to agree with you or not. and at the very least it proves that you are basing your interpretation on something.

Claiming it's only their imagination also seems like an excuse, which I'm a bit wary about. I agree that people could reach to find things to hate in a variety of media, and twist things to suit their narrative, but I'd rather not try to apply that assumption here. The reaction of "Your interpretation is different than mine, and the only possible explanation for this is that you imagined a completely different comic!" deflects any and all criticism of the story, which I think is just as bad as those people who have to reach to find things to hate. If someone is going to go to too far of an effort to criticize a story, then it's also possible for someone to go too far to defend a story. Though it's not really a defense of the story if the only thing you can do is accuse the critic of being delusional.

i really do agree with the thrust of what you're saying, but i also think that it can be pretty easy to spot the ones who are in it just to twist it. the posts are usually full of bile and maliciousness and commentary on things that didn't happen (see any recent political election campaign for further examples). and the worst part? it works. lies and slander and attacks work. people pick up on them and run with it and they become "truths".

how do we tell the ones who are actually making an earnest attempt to criticise? their posts usually contain actual critique. ha.

and to be fair to prof warren, if dismissing honest and genuine critique as imaginary was his m.o, then we would see him do it far more often. he'd very quickly start to look like he was shouting at fairies at the bottom of his garden. in reality, his posts are very rational.

[Shirayuki]

I dunno, the fact that "Ben Reilly" goes out of his way to apprehend anyone who stumbles upon his operation (Sicking his army of resurrected villains on Peter and Gwen) or sending his new Electro after Prowler (who promptly murders him) seems to imply some knowledge of wrongdoing.

He's going after those people(with no intention to harm them) in order to prevent them from shutting him down. Peter's problem with it is moral, while Gwen and Kaine are trying to prevent an outbreak Jackal probably knows nothing about.

He's obviously an antagonist for the others, but I wouldn't say he's acting like a villain or evil.

[Vworp Vworp]

God Maximum Clonage look like Shakespeare compared to this crap.

I'm not sure you can adequately make that call if you're not actually reading it.

As a wise man once said, "You don't have to fall off a cliff to know it hurts".

[boots]

As a wise man once said, "You don't have to fall off a cliff to know it hurts".

he was also probably wise enough to use context