one thing Dan Slott said recently grabbed my attention. he said (and i'm paraphrasing) that J. Jonah Jameson *from the beginning* has said Spider-Man is a menace. but now... everyone LOVES Spider-Man! he's respected and well-liked, even by JJJ.

except...

now he JUST MIGHT BE a menace and only the READER knows it. in effect, DS said, the reader is now J. Jonah Jameson and the Marvel Universe is the one that believes in Spider-Man's heroism.

that's enough to intrigue me, i admit.

••

Mostly because Marvel has spent the last forty years or so systematically stripping out the elements which originally made Spider-Man an intesting character:

• the angst ridden teenager who escapes from his daily drudgery into the "exciting" world of playing superhero

• the outcast/loner who is often painted (erroneously) as the bad guy

• the sad sack who "can't get the girl" *

• the everyman who is constantly vexed by money-worries and family responsibilities -- a tremendous burden for a teenager!

–––––

* Peter Parker is, of course, the "loser" with woman in the Chandler Bing mode; poor devil has a string of gorgeous girlfriends, he just can't seem to hold onto one (tho the next one generally shows up before the previous one's perfume has faded from the air!)

i agree with JB's take on Spider-Man's "evolution" above... but this was the case when Dan Slott took over the book. i don't know, it seems to me Stan Lee was never averse to shaking up titles drastically (bringing two of the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants into the Avengers was a ballsy move, IMHO).

short of restarting the status quo that was gradually shed through the 70s, which would be fine with me, i'm not sure that anything Slott is doing disrespects Spider-Man or negates his core principles. (hopefully i'm not putting words in anyone's mouth by saying this...) if anything, he IS telling stories about "Spider-Man" that could not be told with Random Character X. the proof will be in the pudding-- will the readers respond positively or not once they see Superior Spider-Man?

but that's just me. YMMV.

••

Not really. We knew from the start that Wanda was a "good girl" who had merely fallen into bad company due to what she perceived as her obligation to Magneto. Pietro, while undoubtedly an arrogant jerk, was also only with the Brotherhood for reasons of loyalty, to Wanda in his case. Neither expressed a particular fondness for Magneto's basic philosophies of conquest and domination.

Wanda and Pietro weren't "evil", just "misunderstood" -- among the first in a long line of such heroes!

But this is the same mentality that thinks superheroes should trip over their capes -- it plays against the central conventions of the form. And plays to the inherent self-loathing of so many ennui-engorged fanboys, who want to sneer at their addictions.

Mike Carlin of all people justified Lois Lane figuring out the Superman/Clark Kent connection because her not knowing made her look "stupid."

Yeesh.