Stern did the drop out story in Amazing #243.  (Which would technically be during the Mantlo run on Spectacular... :-) )  He went back a few times after that though.  I know Michelinie put him there and I think the post-Clone Saga creative teams did as well.

Regardless of age, there was a fair of "adultifying" Peter throughout Stan's run, going from "Sally I was wondering if you want to go to a science exhibit" in AF #15 to trying to remove his powers so he could marry Gwen in Amazing #100.  That said, he's struck me as "age neutral" from the latter point of the Stan run to... well, still, really.  Any aging he's undergone since then has come more from "noticing the milestones" (i.e., if he's done with undergraduate study he's probably 21) than any particular change in behavior.

Bruce Buchanan - "Bringing up Peter ceasing to be a student in the mid-1980s is an overlooked development. But I'd say it did more to age the character than the marriage to Mary Jane."

Even though the issue where Peter decided to drop out of school is one of my favorite ever, I've come to see that move and not the marriage as Spider-Man's rubicon.  As Bruce points out, it's when they pulled on that thread that the rest of the concept starts to unravel.  And it's hard to undo the change without both fans and creators feeling like the character is regressing.

Mike

Regardless of age, there was a fair of "adultifying" Peter throughout Stan's run

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

Oh, yeah, there's no doubt that the tone of Amazing Spider-Man changed tremendously during Stan's tenure. It definitely became more "grown-up" and mature.

In addition to gaining his first serious love interest (Betty was more of a high school sweetheart than a real romance), Peter became aware of various social issues, most notably the "Harry Osborn on drugs" trilogy. There's definitely a major change in tone from ASM #1 to ASM #100, no doubt about that.

But still, Peter was a student and single. He was older, but he didn't seem grown up yet and wouldn't for more than a decade to come.

Good call on Amazing #243, Dave - you are exactly right about that. I'd say Peter dropping out of school may have been the only mistake of Roger Stern's brilliant run on the book. So I guess that means that Uncle Rog only gets an A+ instead of an A++!

QUOTE: And it's hard to undo the change without both fans and creators feeling like the character is regressing.

Based on the Stern story, it's not that hard.  He didn't quit school because he finished, but rather because he had other concerns at the time.  To get him back, you just have him feel like he's in a place he can go back, and he does.  Since then, he never seems to leave school so much as writers forget that he was going so they don't have him attending classes anymore.  But it's easy enough to do a "back to school" = "getting life back together" story and just pick up where he left off.  (Albeit with different students in the supporting cast.)

And a certain about of regression is par for the course with continuing characters.  The trick is to make the audience feel like it's a progression that just happens to get you to an earlier status quo rather than a rewind.

Two of these three changes were made by Stan Lee. Did he not get the character ?

Its always seemed clear to me that from the beginning Spider-Man was meant to evolve. Lived, learn, grow. Both as Spidey and Peter.

QUOTE: But back then, Stan assumed that superheroes were just a fad like romance and horror comics before. He had no reason to believe that Spider-Man would still be around today. So he was basically just winging it, waiting for the market to change and for the books to be cancelled.

True enough, but at the same time if he hadn't messed with stuff WOULD Spider-Man still be around today?  The continuing drama, subplots, etc. is what made Marvel MARVEL, set them apart from DC and got them the readers they needed to become the multimedia monolith they are today.  Without it, would we still have Marvel or would we be talking about Spider-Man, the FF, etc. the same way we talk about the MLJ heroes?  (Okay, we'd probably have had a version of the bigger Marvel characters published by DC by now, but other than that... :-) )

WHat charachters out there that have stayed constant enough to meet the standard that many of you are putting to Peter Parker? Even disregarding the fact that he started off pretty young in relation to most charachters and has grown up in front of us (more or less), he has gone through quite a bit if change in his life.

What successful charachters have NOT gone through similarly significant changes during their publishing careers?

For the sake of this arguement I am talking about strictly issues sold in relation to the market place. A charachter that has more success in the form of marketing then actually having people buying the book is not particularly relevant in this limited discussion. Historically speaking Wonder Woman was rarely a great seller off the stands, but was all over the coloring books and birthday party favors.

To backtrack a few posts...

I personally think TM was an OUTSTANDING artist. I still remember quite fondly his run on Infinity Inc at DC. I thought his Batman was pretty good, and I absolutely LOVED his Hulk. I didn't think him on Spider-Man was a good fit, but that doesn't mean the art was bad, just not right for the charachter. I wouldnt want Simonson, Stankewitz, or Mignola on Spider-Man, but how could I not say that Simonson's Thor or Stankewitz's Moon Knight were amazing?

A question for the board regarding the reboot...

I was discussing the reboot with, former Spider-Man writer, Terry Kavanagh--he still reads the books-- and the subject of the  reboot came up. Even though he is a former editor, a writer and a long time comic books reader he wasn't sure if the reboot/deal with the devil also was the solution to the identity reveal. He said he just wasn't sure--also thought hat there was a possibilty that the identtu reveal thing was explained away witht he usage of ---wait for it---wait for it--CLONES?

Can anyone fill in the details.

Side note-- Terry also thought that the Deal With the Devil was set up during Civil Wars when Spider-Man joined Stark's side. Stark being the metaphorical Devil in that storyline. I said I thought he was giving them way too much credit if he believed they were thinking that far in advance.

Howard

So JB,

Are you really unwilling to consider that your memories from your childhood might not be indicitive of what is appealing to kids of today, 30 or however many years it is, later? That seems to be a little self centered, saying "this is how I felt when I was a kid so we should be writing that way for todays kids who should ideally quit comics after a few years anyway".