Posted: 07 November 2005 at 11:14am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
But... but... if he remains in his late twenties (or early thirties) then where is the all-important "change" that pro-agers crave? Won't he need to continue to age for this to be achieved?
**
That has not been my argument. Look, I didn;t ask Peter Parker to age with me. He had already aged by the time I started reading. He existed simultaneously at different ages
-Marvel Masterowrks-which I bought-Lee/Ditko 15-19 or so
-Marvel Tales-varied, often his college or graduate school years
-Regular books-young man early to mid twenties, who married less than a year after I started reading. and these books were constantly referencing the past anyway. He sobbed over Gwen as if it hadn't happened that long ago.
So I can handle different ages and different stories set in different times, as was presented to me. I accept it as it was.
Spider-man to me was always young-but young for me even as a kid included 20s.
Spider-man was more about "the superhero who could be you" i.e. had regular problems, to me.
I related a lot to Peter Parker and still do. He is my favorite character. Even though at age 28, I have (in my reckoning anyway) passed him in age.
Time in comics has always been flexible to me anyway. That is why there could be a Christmas isse every year, and why some characters might age and other stay the same. Heck, my favorite TV shows did that all the time-Family Ties and Growing Pains had infants go the next year into age 4 or 5, without any jump in time or characters aging other than the babies. Linus got closer in age to Charlie Brown even though Charlie didn't really age.
Edited by Rob Hewitt on 07 November 2005 at 11:17am
|