Thor #1 Spoilers

[Alpha to Omega]

I wish I had never asked. Guess we don’t see eye to eye on anything. I certainly don’t recognise any of that as something I ever read.

Of course you don't, it would require you to actually read something other than Aaron's slop.



Nah, obviously Kid Loki having his mind, soul and self being destroyed for this Loki's benefit isn't murder at all. Despite Loki himself, while incapable of lying and in the presence of a human lie detector, stating he killed him. I'm honestly not surprised you think Thor should have no problem with a child being destroyed, I mean you thought it was perfectly fine when he joined Hydra and let them commit atrocities because they held one cancer-stricken woman over his head.

[JKtheMac]

Except others have referred and treated them as two different people. The destruction of the crown wouldn't have happened if Kid Loki hadn't died.

More than that, in terms of personality, they were two very different people. Why then would they not be regarded as such?

Just because it is convenient for certain stories to separate them doesn’t mean they are different characters. Kid Loki was effectively an artificial creation. A kind of self-manipulation. How exactly he can be murdered in the sense you describe is beyond me. The actual act was a betrayal of innocence and potential, equally tragic but not actually murder in the true sense of the word. Twenty Something Loki is effectively Kid Loki with his innocence removed and a recognition of his own destiny. I am sure he has a plan to change that.

[The Cool Thatguy]

Just because it is convenient for certain stories to separate them doesn’t mean they are different characters. Kid Loki was effectively an artificial creation. A kind of self-manipulation. How exactly he can be murdered in the sense you describe is beyond me. The actual act was a betrayal of innocence and potential, equally tragic but not actually murder in the true sense of the word. Twenty Something Loki is effectively Kid Loki with his innocence removed and a recognition of his own destiny. I am sure he has a plan to change that.

He can be murdered because Kid Loki was sentient, with a life all his own that he did not surrender under his own free will.

You're saying it's not murder because Loki engineered his assistance, but that's pure BS. A parent has no right to kill a child, so why should Loki be allowed to kill Kid Loki?

[DurararaFTW]

Except others have referred and treated them as two different people. The destruction of the crown wouldn't have happened if Kid Loki hadn't died.

More than that, in terms of personality, they were two very different people. Why then would they not be regarded as such?

Kid Loki was a reincarnation of Siege-era Loki, the current Loki (who Thor has encountered several times BTW) is consequently his reincarnation, once again encompassing all the thing Loki intentionally closed of to himself in that reincarnation. Kid Loki never existed seperate from the Loki that Thor actually grew up with., He's not Ben Rielly, a clone. He's closer to Superior Spider-man, but without the Doc Ock origin.

[LeonardEugenius]

Why is Jason Aaron always stealing from the X franchise to try and prop up his bad storytelling? Leave the Phoenix alone

[The Cool Thatguy]

Kid Loki was a reincarnation of Siege-era Loki, the current Loki (who Thor has encountered several times BTW) is consequently his reincarnation, once again encompassing all the thing Loki intentionally closed of to himself in that reincarnation. Kid Loki never existed seperate from the Loki that Thor actually grew up with., He's not Ben Rielly, a clone. He's closer to Superior Spider-man, but without the Doc Ock origin.

Except that we saw, for a fact, that they had two different minds and souls. I don't see how being an unwilling pawn makes it ok for Loki to kill his younger self.

[JKtheMac]

Except that we saw, for a fact, that they had two different minds and souls. I don't see how being an unwilling pawn makes it ok for Loki to kill his younger self.

For a FACT? You realise this is a comic. A badly written comic between two much better comics at that. Writers and editors will always disregard things they don’t like. That’s the way it has always been and will continue to be forever more. Aaron isn’t even disregarding it, he just doesn’t appear to agree with your very specific interpretation. Neither do I.

[The Cool Thatguy]

For a FACT? You realise this is a comic. A badly written comic between two much better comics at that. Writers and editors will always disregard things they don’t like. That’s the way it has always been and will continue to be forever more. Aaron isn’t even disregarding it, he just doesn’t appear to agree with your very specific interpretation. Neither do I.

Yes, for a fact.

The plot in which Kid Loki died, hinged on him dying.

For some reason, you're ignoring the scan above which clearly states that Kid Loki was murdered.

And Loki admitted to killing him, when he was unable to lie and his statements were verified by a mystical (human) lie detector.

Now, this could be changed at a later date. That's true.

But right now, it's not been changed. It's a fact that current Loki murdered a child

[JKtheMac]

Yes, for a fact.

The plot in which Kid Loki died, hinged on him dying.

For some reason, you're ignoring the scan above which clearly states that Kid Loki was murdered.

And Loki admitted to killing him, when he was unable to lie and his statements were verified by a mystical (human) lie detector.

Now, this could be changed at a later date. That's true.

But right now, it's not been changed. It's a fact that current Loki murdered a child

I am not ignoring it. I just don’t give it the same weight that you do. You seem to think Loki’s testimony is 100% accurate and not open to interpretation. I don’t agree. You seem to think a self referential roundup in the front of a comic is gospel truth, again I don’t agree. And worse, you would interpret both in such a way to make Loki a much less interesting character, which is something Aaron is clearly not going to do.

And Loki didn’t murder a child. That’s not what actually happened.

[DurararaFTW]

Except that we saw, for a fact, that they had two different minds and souls. I don't see how being an unwilling pawn makes it ok for Loki to kill his younger self.

It's not a matter of okay or not. Loki mutilating himself into one or two things only to then change back has happened before, it'll happen again. Humans have one mind and one soul, Kid Loki was never anything remotely resembling human. Him and Ikol were aspects of the God Loki.

[The Cool Thatguy]

I am not ignoring it. I just don’t give it the same weight that you do. You seem to think Loki’s testimony is 100% accurate and not open to interpretation. I don’t agree. You seem to think a self referential roundup in the front of a comic is gospel truth, again I don’t agree. And worse, you would interpret both in such a way to make Loki a much less interesting character, which is something Aaron is clearly not going to do.

And Loki didn’t murder a child. That’s not what actually happened.

Three different stories addressing what happened to Kid Loki all treated it as murder. Your proof that it's not is simply 'I don't believe it'.

I'll take the word of Loki himself when unable to lie, and in the presence of a mystic lie detector, over your denial. Thanks.

[The Cool Thatguy]

It's not a matter of okay or not. Loki mutilating himself into one or two things only to then change back has happened before, it'll happen again. Humans have one mind and one soul, Kid Loki was never anything remotely resembling human. Him and Ikol were aspects of the God Loki.

So by what right does old Loki have to kill young Loki? If they're the same being, why does kid loki have less right to exist?

[JKtheMac]

It's not a matter of okay or not. Loki mutilating himself into one or two things only to then change back has happened before, it'll happen again. Humans have one mind and one soul, Kid Loki was never anything remotely resembling human. Him and Ikol were aspects of the God Loki.

Exactly. The ‘testimony’ was clearly suspect at the time. It was designed as a mystery. The devil is in the detail. It is a ‘story murder’ an interpretation of the facts that Loki uses to effectively lie to a lie detector. He was using his power in the testimony. He knows as well as the reader that he isn’t telling the truth, but he also isn’t technically lying. The end of JitM is a death of innocence. Kid Loki was himself a lie. The entity that was ‘murdered’ was Loki’s own innocence. His own belief that he could reshape his destiny and escape his past. While all along his past was a part of him and his innocence was a lie. It’s a tragic betrayal. It breaks your heart, but it is only the murder of a child by analogy.

[Prof. Warren]

For a FACT? You realise this is a comic. A badly written comic between two much better comics at that. Writers and editors will always disregard things they don’t like. That’s the way it has always been and will continue to be forever more.

Yes. In serialized storytelling, where writers are constantly building off of what came before, writers and editors obviously will not interpret every past story the same way.

More importantly, they won't weigh every development equally. Some fans think that if a writer doesn't place the same importance on a past plotline as they do, that it's a sign of bad storytelling. But it's up to individual writers and editors to decide what to incorporate as they move forward and what to disregard.

It's simply not possible for characters that have stories that stretch over the course of decades to have every part of that extended narrative, stitched together by multiple creators, to have equal impact as new stories are told.

[JKtheMac]

Three different stories addressing what happened to Kid Loki all treated it as murder. Your proof that it's not is simply 'I don't believe it'.

No I just don’t read the stories the way you do and I am honestly shocked that anyone would. I am pretty sure neither Gillen nor Ewing would actually agree with you either.

I'll take the word of Loki himself when unable to lie, and in the presence of a mystic lie detector, over your denial. Thanks.

He lies! He was the god of stories in that story. He told a story that contained a truth. The very essence of storytelling. He wanted the lie detector to think he was telling the truth. That was part of his plan.