Clone Conspiracy #5

[DV1Band]

It's funny how easily fans want to dismiss a writer's contributions. Slott's been writing Spidey solo for the greater part of a decade now and his run has included several classic storylines so I wouldn't say his importance to the franchise is lacking in any way (especially as the upcoming Spider-Man animated series will be heavily influenced by his run). Bottom line: he's left his mark on the character in a way that few others have. You can like what he's done or not like it but anyone who loves Spider-Man can not afford to ignore Slott's work. It's not a blip in the character's history, it's a sprawling epic. Even as far back as when Slott was working in the BND era, he was already laying down the seeds for the Parker Industries storyline. The man thinks ahead, nothing is casually tossed off and rereading his run will continue to yield fresh insights into just how meticulously his journey for Peter was mapped out.

Yes, Spidey will eventually go on without him. Spider-writers come and go - comic book writing is a never-ending baton race, after all - and Slott will hand off to his successor one day but I think it's going to be very hard for anyone who follows Slott to match or exceed his run.

Honestly, Dan Slott does the equivalent of putting butts in seats. He sells. Controversy creates cash. Marvel won't ask him to leave anytime soon. I liked everything except for Clone Conspiracy. He will eventually move on, but... likely not soon. I'm ok with that.

[David Walton]

I even found a news item confirming this.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/12/...racy-3-shocker

So maybe the Ben Reilly flashback story from the Brand New Day era really was intended as a vehicle to gauge interest in Ben's return?

At any rate, I've waited for Ben's return for a long time...but I can't say I'm enthused about the way it came about, and I don't think I'll be picking up the new book. But never say never, right?

I'm still enjoying DC's back-to-basics approach a lot more.

[Blanks]

I honestly didn't mind this story. Ben's... de-evolution felt organic, taking his torture from the Warren into consideration from his multiple deaths. I kinda want to see where this goes now.

[DV1Band]

I honestly didn't mind this story. Ben's... de-evolution felt organic, taking his torture from the Warren into consideration from his multiple deaths. I kinda want to see where this goes now.

I just don't know. I'm not sure what to make of it.

[Pav]

I honestly didn't mind this story. Ben's... de-evolution felt organic, taking his torture from the Warren into consideration from his multiple deaths. I kinda want to see where this goes now.

I just don't know. I'm not sure what to make of it.

It's just a story, friend! Read it and enjoy the ride, even if it's not quite the ideal journey for Ben you had in mind!

-Pav, who can't wait to see what PAD has in store...

[DV1Band]

It's just a story, friend! Read it and enjoy the ride, even if it's not quite the ideal journey for Ben you had in mind!

-Pav, who can't wait to see what PAD has in store...

I'm going to pick it up, because Ben Reilly and Kaine. Did you see that PAD said that the chances of Aracely showing up are very high?

[David Walton]

I honestly didn't mind this story. Ben's... de-evolution felt organic, taking his torture from the Warren into consideration from his multiple deaths. I kinda want to see where this goes now.

I haven't read Clone Conspiracy, so keep that in mind.

But the problem for me, personally, is that Marvel has taken a strong concept and made it needlessly complicated. It's the story equivalent of adding all those lines to the classic DC costumes. It doesn't make them horrible, but it does muddy their primary virtue, which is simplicity. Ben Reilly is a man trying to rediscover himself after years of thinking he's something less than human. He is not a man whose mind has been broken by torture, but rather one who finds that he can never truly break. (And sometimes he resents that.)

[DV1Band]

I haven't read Clone Conspiracy, so keep that in mind.

But the problem for me, personally, is that Marvel has taken a strong concept and made it needlessly complicated. It's the story equivalent of adding all those lines to the classic DC costumes. It doesn't make them horrible, but it does muddy their primary virtue, which is simplicity. Ben Reilly is a man trying to rediscover himself after years of thinking he's something less than human. He is not a man whose mind has been broken by torture, but rather one who finds that he can never truly break. (And sometimes he resents that.)

Although I get what you're saying, unfortunately, you're not completely aware just how lost Ben is at this point. He's going to have to seriously power back and prove himself...

[David Walton]

Although I get what you're saying, unfortunately, you're not completely aware just how lost Ben is at this point. He's going to have to seriously power back and prove himself...

No, I get that Marvel can write Ben Reilly into as horrific a situation as they desire to justify his villainy. I just think it needlessly complicates a sleek core concept.

[rward777]

Ben the anti hero or anti villian

[Pav]

Ben Reilly is a man trying to rediscover himself after years of thinking he's something less than human. He is not a man whose mind has been broken by torture, but rather one who finds that he can never truly break. (And sometimes he resents that.)

Although I get what you're saying, unfortunately, you're not completely aware just how lost Ben is at this point. He's going to have to seriously power back and prove himself...

No, I get that Marvel can write Ben Reilly into as horrific a situation as they desire to justify his villainy. I just think it needlessly complicates a sleek core concept.

I'm not sure it's realistic to say that Ben, as originally written, was a man who finds he can never truly break. Rather, he exemplifies what it means to be Peter Parker perhaps better than the "real" Peter does himself: he was a man who essentially had his life taken away from him and had to start completely over again, and he found that, over time, he did have the strength of will to do so despite any momentary breakdowns along the way.

(Maybe we're saying essentially the same thing.)

Although, I can't help but wonder: maybe this dip into villainy is really just about putting Ben into a position where he and Peter aren't treating each other like best buddy brothers. Right? Like, several posters seem to have wanted the return of a Ben Reilly who was essentially no different than in his final appearances, but that Ben Reilly was about as close to Peter Parker as anyone. Perhaps the decision was made that Ben's comic should be about him out on his own again - a vagrant, a man figuring out how to re-build his life - and therefore something had to be done so that Peter and Ben wouldn't be able to see eye-to-eye.

-Pav, who is just guessing...

[David Walton]

Ben the anti hero or anti villian

That's Kaine's thing.

My reading of Ben is that he's an inherently decent guy who never lets his circumstances define his moral code.

The current logic parallels some of the problems I had with the 90s Clone Saga's take on Peter. You can write a story in which it's feasible that Peter would unintentionally strike his pregnant wife, but that doesn't make it a good idea. And once you've gone there it's really hard to step back from the stigma you've attached to someone who's supposed to be a hero.

[theoneandonly]

It will bring an additional twist if we see kingpin and all the other villains he resurrected hunting for him and he has to turn to not peter but Kaine for help. Will Kaine help his former brother and idol or will he just kill him?

[DV1Band]

I'm not sure it's realistic to say that Ben, as originally written, was a man who finds he can never truly break. Rather, he exemplifies what it means to be Peter Parker perhaps better than the "real" Peter does himself: he was a man who essentially had his life taken away from him and had to start completely over again, and he found that, over time, he did have the strength of will to do so despite any momentary breakdowns along the way.

(Maybe we're saying essentially the same thing.)

Although, I can't help but wonder: maybe this dip into villainy is really just about putting Ben into a position where he and Peter aren't treating each other like best buddy brothers. Right? Like, several posters seem to have wanted the return of a Ben Reilly who was essentially no different than in his final appearances, but that Ben Reilly was about as close to Peter Parker as anyone. Perhaps the decision was made that Ben's comic should be about him out on his own again - a vagrant, a man figuring out how to re-build his life - and therefore something had to be done so that Peter and Ben wouldn't be able to see eye-to-eye.

-Pav, who is just guessing...

I wholeheartedly agree. Ben's looked at the abyss, and had many momentary breakdowns. However, he endures, even moreso than Peter. However, while I love watching Ben and Peter get along, it may be good for them to have a minor falling out, to say the things that they've likely been holding back. I think that if that happens, it would open the door to the conversation between Kaine and Ben that at least a few of us have been anticipating for some time...

[David Walton]

I'm not sure it's realistic to say that Ben, as originally written, was a man who finds he can never truly break. Rather, he exemplifies what it means to be Peter Parker perhaps better than the "real" Peter does himself: he was a man who essentially had his life taken away from him and had to start completely over again, and he found that, over time, he did have the strength of will to do so despite any momentary breakdowns along the way.

(Maybe we're saying essentially the same thing.)

As originally written, Ben Reilly never abandoned his moral code even when he felt like he was genetic garbage. The writers made an explicit point of this by way of comparison with Peter's reaction when he discovered he was the clone. Now, I don't particularly buy into the way Peter was depicted in Maximum Cloneage, and I pretty much pass over it entirely in my head canon. But at least it's a little easier to walk back from that because it so obviously contradicts Peter Parker's massive comics history. (Even accepting he was the clone, he had more comics to his credit at this point than the original.)

But with Ben, the villainy scheme takes on a bit more weight because there's only two other stories to compare it with: the original and the 90s Clone Saga.

Although, I can't help but wonder: maybe this dip into villainy is really just about putting Ben into a position where he and Peter aren't treating each other like best buddy brothers.

Maybe, but I can't say I feel like the ends justify the means. And you could just as easily create tension with Ben noting that Peter screwed things up with MJ in spite of having everything handed to him (from Ben's clone perspective).