Mighty Thor #705 *Spoliers*

[whiterabbit]

I just think it is important to not let our genre expectations get mixed up with character expectations. As I have said elsewhere, it is entirely feasible that an object forged in a star could be melted by a star. We have not seen it stay deep inside a star for months on end and as such we don't know what will happen outside of our comic knowledge that this is unlikely to be the end of its story.

But this is an assumption with no basis on concrete evidence or fact. It's a theory. What should be ticking people off, and people questioning, is that we know for 100% fact that mjolnir can survive inside the core of the sun with Thor himself with it, but his reaction this issue implies he believes it's destroyed. That doesn't particularly make much sense. It would be like Superman dragging a villain into the sun and saying a personal goodbye to Lois, even though we know he can do this and be fine.

[brettc1]

But this is an assumption with no basis on concrete evidence or fact. It's a theory. What should be ticking people off, and people questioning, is that we know for 100% fact that mjolnir can survive inside the core of the sun with Thor himself with it, but his reaction this issue implies he believes it's destroyed. That doesn't particularly make much sense. It would be like Superman dragging a villain into the sun and saying a personal goodbye to Lois, even though we know he can do this and be fine.

It's hardly the first time Mjolnir has been severely damaged in the comics. I can think of at least three individual occasions where the hammer has been either severely mangled or outright blown to bits.

[JKtheMac]

But this is an assumption with no basis on concrete evidence or fact. It's a theory. What should be ticking people off, and people questioning, is that we know for 100% fact that mjolnir can survive inside the core of the sun with Thor himself with it, but his reaction this issue implies he believes it's destroyed. That doesn't particularly make much sense. It would be like Superman dragging a villain into the sun and saying a personal goodbye to Lois, even though we know he can do this and be fine.

This is exactly what it ISNT like. This is a 'trope based criticism' it is effectively an accusation that Odinson is suffering from plot amnesia. But he isn't. He is applying straightforward logic. He knows the stories about the forging of Mjolnir. He knows it was supposedly forged in a star. It didn't become a hammer without being fashioned. It isn't invulnerable. It can be melted down and it can be destroyed by a star, just as an iron sword would be destroyed if left in a furnace too long. Mjölnir hasn't just been sent into the sun to place Mangog there, it has been sent into the sun to hold him there. I very much doubt Mangog will come back in Aaron's run, that might indicate Mjölnir won't either. Jane knows full well that although the world needs a Thor, that Odinson doesn't need Mjölnir to be that Thor.

Odinson has only very recently even discovered that Mjolnir may have this extra sentience. Something he had only had tiny hints of in his youth. So his perspective on it being alive in the first place is somewhat confused and not based on any real knowledge. He didn't say "You have destroyed Mjölnir, he suggested Thor had killed it. That to him would be a very vague and unclear concept, just as it has been throughout canon. So again, unclear and canonical knowledge, not plot amnesia.

We don't even know what that could mean in the long term. Aaron may not even be clear on this. He may just be leaving options open to future writers way down the line. We don't even know if he plans to bring back Mjölnir in the remains of his run, or if he does, whether it will still be sentient. I would imagine there is a distinct possibility Mjölnir will be back towards the end but it might be gone for years. He may have deliberately left it for others to decide.

What this boils down to is the same thing everyone says when a major character dies. 'How boring, we know they will be back'. This has always been a somewhat strange criticism, and these days not as true as it used to be. The reason for characters returning is partly for IP reasons, and with Movies and TV and their related comics, and with cartoons, also with related all ages comics and vaguely non canonical comics, Marvel can maintain their IP considerations without worrying about bringing such things back into continuity. So we have a reasonable expectation that some things will return, but we can't be sure, and we no longer have the normal legal timetable.

[brettc1]

This is exactly what it ISNT like. This is a 'trope based criticism' it is effectively an accusation that Odinson is suffering from plot amnesia. But he isn't. He is applying straightforward logic. He knows the stories about the forging of Mjolnir. He knows it was supposedly forged in a star. It didn't become a hammer without being fashioned. It isn't invulnerable. It can be melted down and it can be destroyed by a star, just as an iron sword would be destroyed if left in a furnace too long. Mjölnir hasn't just been sent into the sun to place Mangog there, it has been sent into the sun to hold him there. I very much doubt Mangog will come back in Aaron's run, that might indicate Mjölnir won't either. Jane knows full well that although the world needs a Thor, that Odinson doesn't need Mjölnir to be that Thor.

Odinson has only very recently even discovered that Mjolnir may have this extra sentience. Something he had only had tiny hints of in his youth. So his perspective on it being alive in the first place is somewhat confused and not based on any real knowledge. He didn't say "You have destroyed Mjölnir, he suggested Thor had killed it. That to him would be a very vague and unclear concept, just as it has been throughout canon. So again, unclear and canonical knowledge, not plot amnesia.

We don't even know what that could mean in the long term. Aaron may not even be clear on this. He may just be leaving options open to future writers way down the line. We don't even know if he plans to bring back Mjölnir in the remains of his run, or if he does, whether it will still be sentient. I would imagine there is a distinct possibility Mjölnir will be back towards the end but it might be gone for years. He may have deliberately left it for others to decide.

What this boils down to is the same thing everyone says when a major character dies. 'How boring, we know they will be back'. This has always been a somewhat strange criticism, and these days not as true as it used to be. The reason for characters returning is partly for IP reasons, and with Movies and TV and their related comics, and with cartoons, also with related all ages comics and vaguely non canonical comics, Marvel can maintain their IP considerations without worrying about bringing such things back into continuity. So we have a reasonable expectation that some things will return, but we can't be sure, and we no longer have the normal legal timetable.

Has it ACTUALLY been said it was forged in a star? Because if so that is a change in cannon right there. Thirty years ago it was stated quite specifically it was forged in the furnaces of Nidavellir.

[JKtheMac]

Has it ACTUALLY been said it was forged in a star? Because if so that is a change in cannon right there. Thirty years ago it was stated quite specifically it was forged in the furnaces of Nidavellir.

According to the Aaron run they used the power of a star to heat the furnace. The description was of hooking a star and dragging it into the furnaces. The processes consumed the whole star in a day, and was then used to shape Mjolnir, so technically not 'within' a star but with its power.

This is still a story not certain fact, but that's how these things are told, to maintain flexibility. This unreliable narration idea has pretty much been used throughout Thor canon. Aaron probably described using a star because he had this end in sight. The resonance of using chains also supports this idea.

I said 'in' earlier because I had the strong visual memory of the star being chained and dragged, but forgot the detail about consuming it first.

[kilderkin]

According to the Aaron run they used the power of a star to heat the furnace. The description was of hooking a star and dragging it into the furnaces. The processes consumed the whole star in a day, and was then used to shape Mjolnir, so technically not 'within' a star but with its power.

This is still a story not certain fact, but that's how these things are told, to maintain flexibility. This unreliable narration idea has pretty much been used throughout Thor canon. Aaron probably described using a star because he had this end in sight. The resonance of using chains also supports this idea.

I said 'in' earlier because I had the strong visual memory of the star being chained and dragged, but forgot the detail about consuming it first.

That sounds currently correct

Iirc the star was destroyed in the process supposedly killing off the dinosaurs on earth in the process

[whiterabbit]

It's hardly the first time Mjolnir has been severely damaged in the comics. I can think of at least three individual occasions where the hammer has been either severely mangled or outright blown to bits.

Yeah, and we've also seen it inside the core of the sun. I didn't say mjolnir hasn't been broken.

This is exactly what it ISNT like. This is a 'trope based criticism' it is effectively an accusation that Odinson is suffering from plot amnesia. But he isn't. He is applying straightforward logic. He knows the stories about the forging of Mjolnir. He knows it was supposedly forged in a star. It didn't become a hammer without being fashioned. It isn't invulnerable. It can be melted down and it can be destroyed by a star, just as an iron sword would be destroyed if left in a furnace too long. Mjölnir hasn't just been sent into the sun to place Mangog there, it has been sent into the sun to hold him there. I very much doubt Mangog will come back in Aaron's run, that might indicate Mjölnir won't either. Jane knows full well that although the world needs a Thor, that Odinson doesn't need Mjölnir to be that Thor.

Odinson has only very recently even discovered that Mjolnir may have this extra sentience. Something he had only had tiny hints of in his youth. So his perspective on it being alive in the first place is somewhat confused and not based on any real knowledge. He didn't say "You have destroyed Mjölnir, he suggested Thor had killed it. That to him would be a very vague and unclear concept, just as it has been throughout canon. So again, unclear and canonical knowledge, not plot amnesia.

We don't even know what that could mean in the long term. Aaron may not even be clear on this. He may just be leaving options open to future writers way down the line. We don't even know if he plans to bring back Mjölnir in the remains of his run, or if he does, whether it will still be sentient. I would imagine there is a distinct possibility Mjölnir will be back towards the end but it might be gone for years. He may have deliberately left it for others to decide.

What this boils down to is the same thing everyone says when a major character dies. 'How boring, we know they will be back'. This has always been a somewhat strange criticism, and these days not as true as it used to be. The reason for characters returning is partly for IP reasons, and with Movies and TV and their related comics, and with cartoons, also with related all ages comics and vaguely non canonical comics, Marvel can maintain their IP considerations without worrying about bringing such things back into continuity. So we have a reasonable expectation that some things will return, but we can't be sure, and we no longer have the normal legal timetable.

Again, you're assuming mjolnir can be destroyed by the heat of the sun even though we've watched Thor inside the very core of the sun with it. And he himself thinks it's destroyed even though he should know it's not since he has fought inside the sun with it. You're right that we don't know if it can take MONTHS inside the sun, but the flaw here is: it hasn't been inside the sun for months, it just happened in this issue and Thor automatically thinks it's destroyed, when he should KNOW that is not enough to do it. It's a writer forgetting, not knowing, or not caring.

[GodThor]

That sounds currently correct

Iirc the star was destroyed in the process supposedly killing off the dinosaurs on earth in the process

which means even the star couldn't handle it and got "destroyed" in the process.

which makes Mjölnir being destroyed even less sense.

[brettc1]

So is the idea that Mjolnir released all that energy to destroy the Mangog.

Because if so, how is the Solar System still around?

[kilderkin]

which means even the star couldn't handle it and got "destroyed" in the process.

which makes Mjölnir being destroyed even less sense.

I find the idea it been destroyed by a sun just silly

[Anthony W]

It's a writer forgetting, not knowing, or not caring.

What is "Pulling a Jason Aaron?" Alex?

[JKtheMac]

Again, you're assuming mjolnir can be destroyed by the heat of the sun even though we've watched Thor inside the very core of the sun with it. And he himself thinks it's destroyed even though he should know it's not since he has fought inside the sun with it. You're right that we don't know if it can take MONTHS inside the sun, but the flaw here is: it hasn't been inside the sun for months, it just happened in this issue and Thor automatically thinks it's destroyed, when he should KNOW that is not enough to do it. It's a writer forgetting, not knowing, or not caring.

No Odinson doesn't automatically think it has been destroyed. Nowhere does he say this. That is a willfull interpretation. You are asserting this fact but it isn't supported in the actual text. He says "you have killed Mjölnir" that is not the same thing.

which means even the star couldn't handle it and got "destroyed" in the process.

which makes Mjölnir being destroyed even less sense.

Do it doesn't mean that. It means that a star was used to heat the furnace. Nothing to do with being able to "handle it".

I find the idea it been destroyed by a sun just silly

And where exactly is this "idea" coming from? The objections not the text.

----

Anyone would think comics were scientific papers. No superhero comic from the entire history of the medium would suvive this kind of attack on its logic, because comics are not logical. Especially ones about Norse Gods weilding supernatural hammers.

[JKtheMac]

The test of a comic’s ‘logic’ is verisimilitude not realism. If something happens that is fantastical its measure is the surrounding story, and how that plot moment is supported. In the case of Aaron moving Mjölnir off of the board these are numerous.

Writing is a little like a magic trick. It contains an element of illusion and slight of hand. It seeks to maintain a surface of verisimilitude in return for the reader being prepared to “suspend disbelief”. Unfortunately this very phrase has become subverted by many armchair critics. It has come to mean something that is technically impossible, tied up with the notion of immersion. The idea that the reader or viewer need only sit back and enjoy the show, a totally passive concept. No narrative form is like this. The writer is engaged in a contract with the reader or viewer. They provide the verisimilitude and they use techniques to aid and engage the consumer in this process.

Aaron tells us a creation story for Mjölnir, that includes how and why we have ended up with a sentient entity bound into it. By showing us how it was created he gives it a tangible existence and physicality outside of its enchantment and its role in Thor’s story. The Mother of Storm’s element gives it agency with all that entails, a point of view, a potential agenda and independent agency.

This allows Aaron to do things with Mjölnir, from a story perspective, that were not possible before, and maintain verisimilitude:

- He provides it with potential life and mortality. It becomes something that was dormant and is now active, and it becomes something that was born within creation and can die.

- We also have its association by similarity with Uru:
“Some said Uru was a vestage of the earliest of days. Rubble form the Rock of Creation itself. Very few things ever endured that long. The Storm was one of them.”

- It is used as a symbol of contract and unity:
“A symbol of the unbreakable bond that has been built between dwarfs and the gods”
And given that this bond is not ‘unbreakable’ and is very much strained due to Odin and Cul’s policy on the war, this also reflects upon the idea of things not lasting forever.

- The storm mirrors Mangog in its agency:
“The worst of its wrath was reserved only for those who truly deserved it… It came for the gods.”

- Its ‘final’ act contains chains and a star, just as the making of Mjölnir did.

So breaking down this apparently challenging assertion by Odinson that Thor has killed Mjölnir, we have the act being wilful on the part of Mjölnir, tying back to its agency. We have the assertion that it is possible for it to die, tying back to it having sentience and being forged and formed from elements that were brought together and can be separated again. We have the return of chains and a star, reminding us of the forging. We have Mangog, reminding us of that early judgement and the independent agency of Mjölnir. And, deep in the ongoing story we have this idea that Odin’s wilful disassociation from his ‘creation’ and the people that live in the realms, the unity of which, the Uru that formed the body of Mjölnir, was a symbol.

But to get this from the comic the reader needs to put the effort in. We need to do the work and find the associations. Verisimilitude is not a one way street, or an immersive experience.

The effort we put in can be positive or negative. We can seek the links and meanings, and enjoy the skill of the writer, or we can continually rail against it, picking apparent holes when information is not spoon-fed to us. When a writer puts in this much effort I would recommend the former. There is much reward in this.

[brettc1]

No Odinson doesn't automatically think it has been destroyed. Nowhere does he say this. That is a willfull interpretation. You are asserting this fact but it isn't supported in the actual text. He says "you have killed Mjölnir" that is not the same thing.

I wouldn't call that a wilful interpretation as much as a reasonable inference. Destroyed and killed are pretty much synonymous.

Anyone would think comics were scientific papers. No superhero comic from the entire history of the medium would suvive this kind of attack on its logic, because comics are not logical. Especially ones about Norse Gods weilding supernatural hammers.

Stories should be internally logical.

For example - Star Trek transporters are fantastical in terms of their ability to move matter from place to place, and so do not need to adhere to the rules of what we know in terms of physics. But within the story they exist in, there are rules which are widely known to apply, such as not being able to use them to send matter through a star ships energy shields. If this internal logic of the story is violated without explanation, it acts to pull readers out of the story because they are suddenly confronted with something that does not make sense based on what the author has told them.

In short, even fantastical stories need to be consistent within themselves and their own rules. So as a meaningful example, if Marvel Odin is going to start acting like a rampant misogynist tool where he never has before, that should be explained.

We can seek the links and meanings, and enjoy the skill of the writer, or we can continually rail against it, picking apparent holes when information is not spoon-fed to us. When a writer puts in this much effort I would recommend the former. There is much reward in this.

A writer can write a technically good story that still does not resonate with all audiences. I think Aaron generally plots his stories well, but his decision to ignore or rewrite certain facets of what has gone before in Thor's book marks him down for my personal enjoyment.

Also, if you're going to use words like verisimilitude please provide a link to a meaning. Or else just say 'the appearance of reality.' LOL

[kilderkin]

No Odinson doesn't automatically think it has been destroyed. Nowhere does he say this. That is a willfull interpretation. You are asserting this fact but it isn't supported in the actual text. He says "you have killed Mjölnir" that is not the same thing.



Do it doesn't mean that. It means that a star was used to heat the furnace. Nothing to do with being able to "handle it".



And where exactly is this "idea" coming from? The objections not the text.

----

Anyone would think comics were scientific papers. No superhero comic from the entire history of the medium would suvive this kind of attack on its logic, because comics are not logical. Especially ones about Norse Gods weilding supernatural hammers.

With all due respect I'm not trying to formulate a theorem here

I'm simply saying the idea that the most legendary weapon in marvels heroic arsenal was bested by the same things that helped forge it, that it has been described as being killed by, as silly

It's a comic, silly things happen all the time

Sure it's not a peer reviewed paper on uru metallurgy, but given the internal logic of the mythos, that we have seen it endure a stars core before, and that we know it's magic, I conclude yo say it's been killed, as a hammer, to be silly

In what way is it wrong to think a hammer being killed, isn't silly

Didn't say it was wrong or bad

Though I would say it's not enough to do the job myself based on what's done it before, the beyonder, bor, the darkgods, Thors own power, not something as normal as heat alone (were there other times? )

Always mystic or cosmic powers as I recall

Do we know how far into the sun it went incidentally

Speaking for myself, if you notice realise there is some bitterness at ja writing here, I'll be honest, that's true

I have very little good will for the creative that I feel has damaged thors mythos in such a way it may take years to recover if ever - looking at you over there in one more day spider land

I've always respected what he did with Jane, but for a lot of other stuff, not so much