| Posted: 22 March 2011 at 11:00am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Setting aside, for a moment, the fact that Gwen's death has caused much damage to the Spider-mythos (primarily because fans can't let go, and writers won't stop milking it), I think leaving her dead was the right thing to do. While I think that story is an all-time great, and reinforces several of the core elements of Spider-Man's character, perhaps another tactic should have been taken, like phasing Gwen out without killing her. Conway and company had the right idea--Mary Jane was a more compelling love interest for Peter, and the Peter/Gwen relationship had become so locked in (and had become rather cyclical, with one faux-drama stunt after another; the death of her father, break-ups/reunions, etc.), it would eventually have to lead to marriage--something that wouldn't be good for Spider-Man. So, they had to kill her, phase her out, or have them get married. As it happened, killing Gwen did indeed give the book the shot in the arm Marvel was hoping for. The short-term effects were good. The long-term effects (when the archaeologists took over)...not so good. While some have said that Conway needlessly dredged up Gwen's death with the clone storyline, I think it was a really clever way of messing with the readers (and Spider-Man), and telling an epic tale. The very notion of the Jackal using Gwen's clone as a psychological weapon against Parker (and the readers) was very gutsy. And, of course, the whole point of the story was to show that Peter had moved on, and by the end, he consummates his relationship with Mary Jane.
Edited by Greg Kirkman on 22 March 2011 at 11:01am
|
Topic Closed)
