Bruce Buchanan:

QUOTE: I'd agree that having Peter get married in the first place was a bad idea (although a bad idea that originated with Stan Lee). But on the list of things that needs "fixing," it's way down on the list. What Spider-Man needs is a return to basic, traditional storytelling without all of the hopelessness and gloom that has surrounded the character in the past 10 years or so. If that doesn't happen, it doesn't really matter much if he's married or single.

I agree.

The marriage was one of the "wrong things"... but, compared to other stuff I have seen in these years, it was only the top of the iceberg. I hope they really cancelled it all.

Howard, in response to your question, I'll agree with most of what Glenn just wrote.

I'm glad they rebooted the thing. I'm glad the marriage is gone. I really HOPE this gets things back to the root of the character.

What I don't like is the way the reboot was executed.

If this results in better stories being told in the future, that will be a good thing. It's the way they got there that I find annoying.

QUOTE: Everyone here seems to hate this idea. My question is WHY?

#1 The idea goes against the "normalness" that I see as vital to the character and series.  I can understand why people don't like the marriage, but it fits nicely with the basic idea of a "normal guy superhero."  (So would divorce, which would be my preferred route to break up the marriage.)  Satanic beings causing major life upheavels goes completely against the concept.  I can live with it for a standalone story or two, but as a way to do a major status quo change it just doesn't seem right.

(It's similar to the problem I had with the "Peter's a clone" reveal and Ben Reilly getting the title role.  I can support replacing Peter with a new younger model if creative types feel it necessary, but having a Spider-Man with "I had to change my name and appearance and can't speak to any of my old friends because my clone has taken over my life" in his backstory just comes across as wrong.)

#2 I'm not a big fan of "partial cosmic resets" in general.  Full on reboot once in awhile or minor tweaks to the backstory I can handle, but "okay, just go back to #180" reboots bug me.

#3 The story reads like Peter, MJ, and heck, Mephisto, are doing what they're doing because the plot requires it rather than stemming naturally from the characters.

For me, it's just another instance of me liking the character, but not wild about the execution of the stories.  I've enjoyed Spider-Man as a character since my age was in the single digits...but then and now, I've not cared overly much for the bulk of the stories he's been in.

The deal with Mephisto, as others have said, just doesn't "feel right" for the character (or MJ).  It feels as if there should be another shoe to drop, but at the same time feels like there won't be.  Unless, of course, the new status quo goes over like a lead balloon.

Also, I've never been overly bothered by the marriage...I've read good and bad Spider-Man stories with him single and married.  As I stated over in the "Pull List" thread (but seems to have been truncated from when I pasted that post in this one), if they TRULY felt it necessary to eliminate the marriage, it feels as if OMD threw out the baby with the bathwater.

So for me, it's that they would chose saving Aunt May over their marriage.  I understand you have to have Aunt May for the reboot to work as a reboot, but this doesn't make sense to me.

I also think we were stuck with the marriage and TPTB should have worked hard not to move time forward any more.

No death of Aunt May, no kids, no Sins of the past.

But they cannot leave anything alone.  Just write new Spider-Man stories.  Stop writing stories to change Spider-Man.

Brendan, had Marvel actually done something like that, I could live with it.  That kind of story almost "makes sense".  It not only gives a fresh "soft" reboot, but it also does away with all that crap JMS put in there as well.  And by having Gwen back, in that way, would add to the tension.  Hell, if that's how they did it, I'd be willing to buy the book again!

Right now, Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson are forever tainted.  Or until Marvel decides to hit the "undo" button on this one.

The thing that bothers me is the way the JMS run (even though some yarns may have been a bit wonky) is so casually tossed aside.

I don't think that's a fair solution for the newer fans that have started collecting the title over the last few years.

Here's a fundamental question: What would Aunt May say--and what would
she think of Peter--if she knew what he did in order to save her life?

**************

SER: The big problem I see with tying the undoing of the marriage with Aunt May is that it infantilizes Peter on an emotionally thematic level. In many ways, the story seems to overtly state that (e.g. Peter and MJ's future child who is now "lost" as a result of the deal).

Although a father giving away the bride is an overt part of the wedding ceremony, just as relevant is the fact that the mother "gives" away the groom to the bride. The bride now replaces the mother as the most important woman in the groom's life.

Peter, however, abandons the responsibility and adulthood of marriage for the comfort and security of youth (represented by having his "mother" figure around to take care of him).

Now, Peter's choice wasn't that cut and dried -- Aunt May wasn't dying of cancer. She was dying because Peter had revealed his identity to the world. But Aunt May herself was critical in that choice and as a grown woman, surely knew the consequences. I actually think the storyline might have been more tolerable if Aunt May had not known that Peter was Spider-Man and had not encouraged him to reveal his identity. If someone had happened to discover that Spider-Man was Peter Parker and shot Aunt May, you could argue that she had no idea the danger she was in and the risks she was taking. But she chose to live in Avengers Mansion, after all.

Not to ramble on for too long, but I think JMS and Quesada have greatly infantilized Peter over the years, in his relationship to Tony Stark (the "father figure" he had never needed before. Even the first Spider-Man film got that right -- "I have a father. His name is Ben Parker.") and his leaning on Aunt May. Before Aunt May knew his identity, she was part of his responsibility -- now she was someone he could confide in about his problems.

Yes, I know that in most families, that's the case, but what always appealed to me about Spider-Man was that despite his youth and despite the dumb decisions he could often make becaues of his youth, he ultimately behaved like a man -- taking his lumps and shouldering the consequences of his actions. No one else could bail him out.