Does the Removal of the Marriage negate twenty years of continuity?

[Farmernudie]

I am trying to say this without my own bias, but i honestly think the married regular continuity spidey would sell better, IF given the choice of the two. I am not afraid of having that happen. Even if i DID like single specific spidey stories, which i've not seen evidence of any so far, i still think MORE customers want un-altered continuity, that doesn't insult their intelligence or negate the comics they collected for 20 years, even if it is not about the marriage also.

Yeh yeh..."everything is the same and happened the same, even though it never happened, so conitnuity isn' altered and blah..."

Or..."you're just not trying to like it hard enough!"

One shouldn't have to be Tinkerbell and clap louder to like something they're prone to love to begin with, but can't now, because it is so mangled.

[whiteshark]

I am trying to say this without my own bias, but i honestly think the married regular continuity spidey would sell better, IF given the choice of the two. I am not afraid of having that happen. Even if i DID like single specific spidey stories, which i've not seen evidence of any so far, i still think MORE customers want un-altered continuity, that doesn't insult their intelligence or negate the comics they collected for 20 years, even if it is not about the marriage also.

Peter Parker and Mary Jane maried in the regular continuity would not sell better as you claim.
Spider-Girl features a maried Peter Parker and Mary Jane and the franchise can hardly keep himself to be in the print as far as i can see.
The OMD story didnt negate any story since all stories hapened the same except the mariage.
The stories in ASM doesnt insult my inteligence,and i dont see many times people actually saying that a comic book is insulting to the inteligence.

[Farmernudie]

WHITESHARK:
Peter Parker and Mary Jane maried in the regular continuity would not sell better as you claim. Spider-Girl features a maried Peter Parker and Mary Jane and the franchise can hardly keep himself to be in the print as far as i can see.

The OMD story didnt negate any story since all stories hapened the same except the mariage. The stories in ASM doesnt insult my inteligence,and i dont see many times people actually saying that a comic book is insulting to the inteligence..

This connection you are making is both slightly entertaining and insulting.

You're comparing two seperate things. One.

Two, boiling it down to being about marriage, ONLY, and relating THAT to Spider-GIRL sales, is odd, at best, imo.

Spider-Girl sales, good or bad, has nothing to do with, single or married, Amazing Spider-Man sales.

You are saying, Amazing Spider-Man sales, as we've always known it, would no longer sell suddenly, due to Spider-Girl not selling well. Wow.

Also, OMD/BND does negate stories. 20 years worth. The marriage never happened. That is totally negated. Different history.

Why would they have to tell THAT story in the future, (WHY they never married) of what happened in this reality (they married), if it was the SAME? There is no point in telling the same story over again (the marriage), to explain the same story, if nothing changed.
Marvel, according to you, must be WASTING a lot of time now & in the future, explaining things, since nothing is different.

[whiteshark]

This connection you are making is both slightly entertaining and insulting.

You're comparing two seperate things. One.

Two, boiling it down to being about marriage, ONLY, and relating THAT to Spider-GIRL sales, is odd, at best, imo.

Spider-Girl sales, good or bad, has nothing to do with, single or married, Amazing Spider-Man sales.

You claimed that ASM would sell better if they featured a maried Spider-Man.
As if there is a big quantity of people which are just not reading ASM because of the status quo of the main character.:rolleyes:
And if that`s the case then when BND started,the sales of the Spider-Girl comic book would actually improve which is not the reality.
So is logical to say that if Peter Parker and Mary Jane were maried in the stories would not mean that ASM would have more people reading as you claim.
Since there is already another comic book that features a maried Peter Parker and which have not been seling much more since the start of BND.

Also, OMD/BND does negate stories. 20 years worth. The marriage never happened. That is totally negated. Different history.

Its not a diferent history because all the stories hapened the same except the mariage.
All the plots,dialogues scenes are exactly the same so obviusly OMD doesnt negate any story since they are all the same except Peter Parker and Mary Jane were living together instead of being maried.
A small change that doesnt change older stories,and just add more greatness to the history of Spider-Man in the comics which just shows that Spider-Man history changes according with the stories being written in the comic book.

[Patrick Hultquist]

You claimed that ASM would sell better if they featured a maried Spider-Man.
As if there is a big quantity of people which are just not reading ASM because of the status quo of the main character.:rolleyes:
And if that`s the case then when BND started,the sales of the Spider-Girl comic book would actually improve which is not the reality.
So is logical to say that if Peter Parker and Mary Jane were maried in the stories would not mean that ASM would have more people reading as you claim.

None of this makes any sense.

Since there is already another comic book that features a maried Peter Parker and which have not been seling much more since the start of BND.

Amazing Spider-Girl does not feature a married Peter Parker. It has within its pages a married Peter Parker, but the featured character is Mayday Parker. And that's entirely different from what was had before. The two are not equal.

Its not a diferent history because all the stories hapened the same except the mariage.

Any difference, no matter how minute, constitutes a difference. By definition. Ergo, it is a different history.

All the plots,dialogues scenes are exactly the same so obviusly OMD doesnt negate any story since they are all the same except Peter Parker and Mary Jane were living together instead of being maried.

You know this how? Have your issues magically been reprinted? Because mine haven't.
And there are plenty of pieces of dialogue where Peter Parker refers to his wife or his marriage, which in the context of having no marriage is pretty contradictory to what you're stating.

A small change that doesnt change older stories,and just add more greatness to the history of Spider-Man in the comics which just shows that Spider-Man history changes according with the stories being written in the comic book.

You celebrate a mutable history why? I can't possibly fathom how changing a backstory at a whim is in any way a good thing.

As for it being a small change, you go and tell your wife that your entire married history is a fraud. In the meantime, I'll clean my guest bedroom out for your impending extended stay.

[The Shadow]

Also, OMD/BND does negate stories. 20 years worth. The marriage never happened. That is totally negated. Different history.

ne⋅gate

–verb (used with object)
1. to deny the existence, evidence, or truth of: an investigation tending to negate any supernatural influences.
2. to nullify or cause to be ineffective: Progress on the study has been negated by the lack of funds.

Joe Q: "The truth of the matter is that we're committed to preserving as much of these stories as is humanly possible, but because the marriage is no more and now never was, there are going to be elements that have changed. It's inevitable. But we're striving to keep those ripple effects minor, and you can suss them out in most older stories if you just give it a moment's thought. So Jonathan Caeser stalked a single Mary Jane rather than a married Mary Jane, Norman Osborn and Venom once knew that Peter Parker was Spider-Man but forgot along with the rest of the world, and so on."

Also from Joe Q: "I'm not quite sure where you're getting the idea that al these things didn't happen? I mean I completely get your concern, but that's not what we've done here. We've worked very hard to keep the stories that happened as is with only the slightest tweaks here and there like the fact that Peter and MJ never went through with the marriage."

Seems Joe disagrees.

No offense but I'll take his word over yours.

[Farmernudie]

Seems Joe disagrees.

No offense but I'll take his word over yours.

haha...that's fine. joe changes his "hype" and explanations for stuff all the time.

What this is all about for him, is having his cake and eating it too. He can change whatever it was he WANTED changed, and just "Say" nothing else is changed. However, when you apply LOGIC, you know that the smallest change of the past, ripple effects the present and everything in a major way. He also said nothing orignally was meant to be explained in OMD/BND. Now they're taking lots of time to explain it, because even pro-reboot people are asking questions constantly.

He wants to drop a giant bomb, but just neatly say..."nothing got hit but one building." No ripple effect. No collateral damage. "All the same." NEato Mosquito. I've got some swamp land to sell ya too!

Even his other Marvel time travel stories follow this concept of changing things in time, yet he CONVENIENTLY wants to ignore it here, because this is to only magiclaly change the marriage, and web shooters, and Harry is alive.

And somehow, if you only clap loud enough like tinkerbell, a giant change like people never marrying doesn''t change ANYTHING in 20 years of time, when the smallest thing can change everything, except when joe mandates NEW RULES...ok, you believe him!

If i had never married my wife, who knows how things would have turned out???!!! It would change everything!!

[The Shadow]

You know this how? Have your issues magically been reprinted? Because mine haven't.
And there are plenty of pieces of dialogue where Peter Parker refers to his wife or his marriage, which in the context of having no marriage is pretty contradictory to what you're stating.

I know that Flash Thompson never went to Vietnam but my issues say he did . I also know Peter and the gang wore bell bottoms in the 60's and 70's and those issues haven't been magically reprinted or changed.

Just as I know Tony Stark was hurt in Vietnam and not the first Gulf War. Just as I also know Steve Rogers fought into the 1950s with Bucky who did NOT die on a Baron Zemo bomb.

Retcons happen ALL the time in comics. Changing a word from wife to girlfriend doesn't require that much imagination and is certainly easier to grasp than the groovy clothes and Vietnam veteran Flash.

[The Shadow]

haha...that's fine. joe changes his "hype" and explanations for stuff all the time.

Except he's been saying the same thing since December of 2008.

What this is all about for him, is having his cake and eating it too. He can change whatever it was he WANTED changed, and just "Say" nothing else is changed. However, when you apply LOGIC, you know that the smallest change of the past, ripple effects the present and everything in a major way. He also said nothing orignally was meant to be explained in OMD/BND. Now they're taking lots of time to explain it, because even pro-reboot people are asking questions constantly.

He wants to drop a giant bomb, but just neatly say..."nothing got hit but one building." No ripple effect. No collateral damage. "All the same." NEato Mosquito. I've got some swamp land to sell ya too!

And with love I give you the :rolleyes:

And somehow, if you only clap loud enough like tinkerbell, a giant change like people never marrying doesn''t change ANYTHING in 20 years of time, when the smallest thing can change everything, except when joe mandates NEW RULES...ok, you believe him!

If i had never married my wife, who knows how things would have turned out???!!! It would change everything!!

Man you sure were rambling there! And avoiding all my other points! you're one of THOSE guys huh? :rolleyes:

[whiteshark]

None of this makes any sense.



Amazing Spider-Girl does not feature a married Peter Parker. It has within its pages a married Peter Parker, but the featured character is Mayday Parker. And that's entirely different from what was had before. The two are not equal.

My point was that if just having a married Peter Parker was reason enough to improve sales in ASM,then much more people would have been reading Spider-Girl comics since it features Peter Parker and Mary Jane being maried.
Since as far as i know this is not hapening,then i guess that having a maried Peter Parker in the stories is not enough of a reason do the sales in ASM improve.
Surelly Spider-Girl is a completely diferent comic book,but still it features a maried Peter Parker in the stories and the sales have been about the same since the start of BND i think.

:Any difference, no matter how minute, constitutes a difference. By definition. Ergo, it is a different history..

The stories have a small diference since OMD,but still is such a small change that do not take any merit from stories before OMD.Since the change is small.

:You know this how? Have your issues magically been reprinted? Because mine haven't.
And there are plenty of pieces of dialogue where Peter Parker refers to his wife or his marriage, which in the context of having no marriage is pretty contradictory to what you're stating.

But stories changes,and the stories all hapened the same anyways except the mariage that is gone.
And just change in the examples you are saying in those pieces of dialogue,to which if i want to be technicly correct analysing those stories in continuity is just a matter of realizing that those stories had Peter Parker and Mary Jane living together.

:You celebrate a mutable history why? I can't possibly fathom how changing a backstory at a whim is in any way a good thing.

I rather have a comic book charcater that have a dinamic and not inert history that changes in ways that i can not guess that have the same character with a history that is predictable and in the future shows to be predictable as well.

[Patrick Hultquist]

My point was that if just having a married Peter Parker was reason enough to improve sales in ASM,then much more people would have been reading Spider-Girl comics since it features Peter Parker and Mary Jane being maried.
Since as far as i know this is not hapening,then i guess that having a maried Peter Parker in the stories is not enough of a reason do the sales in ASM improve.
Surelly Spider-Girl is a completely diferent comic book,but still it features a maried Peter Parker in the stories and the sales have been about the same since the start of BND i think.

It's not Spider-Man's book. He's a supporting cast member, in the same way Harry Osborn is in Spider-Man's book. It's a weak substitute, and not even worth mentioning as such.

The stories have a small diference since OMD,but still is such a small change that do not take any merit from stories before OMD.Since the change is small.

I think we can agree on two things here;

1) There have to be differences between what was printed and what actually happened.
2) You don't care about these differences.

That's fine. But now that you have acknowledged that differences have to exist, allow for the fact that those differences matter to others.

But stories changes,and the stories all hapened the same anyways except the mariage that is gone.
And just change in the examples you are saying in those pieces of dialogue,to which if i want to be technicly correct analysing those stories in continuity is just a matter of realizing that those stories had Peter Parker and Mary Jane living together.

Two things - Joe Q. has acknowledged that something else changed besides the marriage. So your statement that the stories all happened the same isn't true.
The other thing is that not only did the dialogue change, the emotional weight behind quite a bit of that dialogue had to change as well. Writers hinge dialogue on the emotional investment a reader has with the characters. It's impossible to prove, but it's safe to speculate those same stories, while they may have happened the same way, sure wouldn't read the same way.

I rather have a comic book charcater that have a dinamic and not inert history that changes in ways that i can not guess that have the same character with a history that is predictable and in the future shows to be predictable as well.

That whole sentence contradicted itself.

I know that Flash Thompson never went to Vietnam but my issues say he did . I also know Peter and the gang wore bell bottoms in the 60's and 70's and those issues haven't been magically reprinted or changed.

Just as I know Tony Stark was hurt in Vietnam and not the first Gulf War. Just as I also know Steve Rogers fought into the 1950s with Bucky who did NOT die on a Baron Zemo bomb.

Retcons happen ALL the time in comics. Changing a word from wife to girlfriend doesn't require that much imagination and is certainly easier to grasp than the groovy clothes and Vietnam veteran Flash.

There's a HUGE difference between a sliding time scale rendering contemporary references moot and an editorially mandated storyline shoehorned into place on the flimsiest or premises. It's disingenous to pretend otherwise.
And besides, while it may not be the hardest of imaginative exercises to substitute a word, that wasn't really my point. My point was that saying that everything's the same except the marriage has already been contradicted by Joe Q., so it's a specious argument to even present in terms of exulting OMD.

[The Shadow]

There's a HUGE difference between a sliding time scale rendering contemporary references moot and an editorially mandated storyline shoehorned into place on the flimsiest or premises. It's disingenous to pretend otherwise.

Which is why I included Bucky and Cap surviving World War 2... but there's also Bucky surviving his initial retcon or the whole Invaders history!

while it may not be the hardest of imaginative exercises to substitute a word, that wasn't really my point. My point was that saying that everything's the same except the marriage has already been contradicted by Joe Q.,

Joe hasn't contradicted himself at all. Right from the start he's said there were changes. The interview I'm quoting was December 2008... a month after OMD finished.

In the interview I posted (MANY times) Joe says: "The truth of the matter is that we're committed to preserving as much of these stories as is humanly possible, but because the marriage is no more and now never was, there are going to be elements that have changed. It's inevitable. But we're striving to keep those ripple effects minor, and you can suss them out in most older stories if you just give it a moment's thought. So Jonathan Caeser stalked a single Mary Jane rather than a married Mary Jane, Norman Osborn and Venom once knew that Peter Parker was Spider-Man but forgot along with the rest of the world, and so on."

And further down: "We've worked very hard to keep the stories that happened as is with only the slightest tweaks here and there like the fact that Peter and MJ never went through with the marriage."

[Jim Thompson]

Joe hasn't contradicted himself at all. Right from the start he's said there were changes. The interview I'm quoting was December 2008... a month after OMD finished.

In the interview I posted (MANY times) Joe says: "The truth of the matter is that we're committed to preserving as much of these stories as is humanly possible, but because the marriage is no more and now never was, there are going to be elements that have changed. It's inevitable. But we're striving to keep those ripple effects minor, and you can suss them out in most older stories if you just give it a moment's thought. So Jonathan Caeser stalked a single Mary Jane rather than a married Mary Jane, Norman Osborn and Venom once knew that Peter Parker was Spider-Man but forgot along with the rest of the world, and so on."

And further down: "We've worked very hard to keep the stories that happened as is with only the slightest tweaks here and there like the fact that Peter and MJ never went through with the marriage."

And of course that slight tweek like the pregnancy never happening -- just a minor little thing.

[whiteshark]

It's not Spider-Man's book. He's a supporting cast member, in the same way Harry Osborn is in Spider-Man's book. It's a weak substitute, and not even worth mentioning as such.

I dont know if it is a weak substitute.
I would think that if there are many people not reading Spider-Man stories,just because Peter Parker is not maried then the closest thing of a comic book that shows a maried Peter Parker would be what many of those people would read.
I get what you are saying that Peter Parker is a suporting cast member in Spider-Girl,but still to see that the sales of Spider-Girl being about the same since the start of BND it makes me think the people that are not reading Spider-Man stories are doing it more because of personal preference that anything else and not because Peter Parker is single in ASM,since in Spider-Girl there is a maried Peter Parker and this comic book have not improved sales since the start of BND as far as i know
I am not saying that all people that claim that are not reading ASM anymore because of the mariage,would read Spider-Girl but a good part of those people would be reading Spider-Girl if they only stoped reading ASM because Peter Parker is not maried anymore in the stories.

I think we can agree on two things here;

1) There have to be differences between what was printed and what actually happened.
2) You don't care about these differences.

That's fine. But now that you have acknowledged that differences have to exist, allow for the fact that those differences matter to others.

Well i only speak for myself.
But why would be a change in the stories be relevant to how the stories are viewed?
To me its not small retcons and changes of direction of stories (which are essential in the long run to keep the stories interesting) that takes my enjoyment of the stories.
Point in case,would it be relevant if when Peter Parker and Mary Jane got maried in the stories twenty years ago i`d change my view of the stories and it would matter to me the change in the stories in that time?
Changes in stories have to happen to keep the stories interesting and as long they improve the stories they are welcome.

Two things - Joe Q. has acknowledged that something else changed besides the marriage. So your statement that the stories all happened the same isn't true.
The other thing is that not only did the dialogue change, the emotional weight behind quite a bit of that dialogue had to change as well. Writers hinge dialogue on the emotional investment a reader has with the characters. It's impossible to prove, but it's safe to speculate those same stories, while they may have happened the same way, sure wouldn't read the same way.

I am aware that something else has changed besides the marriage.
But i rather not speculate about that,since i dont know what it is.
I am just going with what was showed in the stories so far in which all the stories hapened the same except the mariage.
I disagree that the emotional weight behind the dialogue have to change,all the dialogue can be read the same way.
Since the relationship Peter Parker and Mary Jane had was the same in the stories,the characters now are just set as just they lived together instead of being maried.This doesnt change the emotional weight of the dialogue.

That whole sentence contradicted itself.

I must have expressed myself poorly.
What i mean,is that i enjoy that the direction of stories of the Spider-Man stories change from time to time.Which is normal in Spider-Man stories.
And alterating the history of Spider-Man is not something that i mind to see,since it revitalize older stories.

[Farmernudie]

Point in case,would it be relevant if when Peter Parker and Mary Jane got maried in the stories twenty years ago i`d change my view of the stories and it would matter to me the change in the stories in that time?
Changes in stories have to happen to keep the stories interesting and as long they improve the stories they are welcome.

Yeh, but again, them getting married didn't change history/reality as we knew it.

Them now, saying it didn't ever happen negates it, because it did.

We are not talking change, or evolution, such as....now they are divorced, or now Pete is going back to college or something.

Again, if I had NEVER married my wife, my history would be entirely different, besides that one fact. Who knows how it would have varied and branched off differently. The possibilities are endless, really. Or i can just say..."everything happened the same". The latter is hilarious, and takes the easy way out. It cheats.