| Author |
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 132281
|
| Posted: 01 June 2015 at 1:34pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
(I also seem to remember that the death of Gwen Stacy was explained as a broken neck years later because it had been pointed out by fans in the letter column or something)••• Explained, perhaps, by someone who had read the story! (Ah, the first issue of AMAZING SPIDER-MAN I bought upon my return to the comicbook fold.)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Eric Ladd
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 August 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 4506
|
| Posted: 01 June 2015 at 1:49pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
That must have been a bit of a shock.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Olav Bakken
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 June 2014
Posts: 241
|
| Posted: 01 June 2015 at 1:51pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Well, I must admit I don't remember when it was, just that the story used to be it was the fall itself that caused it, and then the cause was changed to a broken neck. Based on your comment it sounds like it was officially a broken neck at first, then changed before returning to the neck again.
Yes, I hear stories sometimes how future writers back then discovered or rediscovered Spider-Man and Fantastic Four and other titles. It's easy to readers who came later to take them for granted considering they were already established by then, but it does sound like they make quite an impression.
My first shocking experience with comic book deaths was Jarella's death.
Edited by Olav Bakken on 01 June 2015 at 1:54pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Marc Cheek
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 18 June 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1785
|
| Posted: 01 June 2015 at 3:04pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
If I'm remembering correctly, the was a distinctive SNAP sound effect
in ASM 122, so I think the broken neck explanation was always there.
My memory could be faulty though...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Olav Bakken
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 June 2014
Posts: 241
|
| Posted: 01 June 2015 at 4:39pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Or all the buzz could have been about the fact that it was actually Spider-Man himself who killed her while trying to save her, when it was first assumed she was already dead or was caused by the fall (either by readers or himself). Which would be hard for Peter when he found out. Not sure what exactly the discussion was about, but either way the comics returned to that specific moment years later for some additional info.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stephen Robinson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5835
|
| Posted: 01 June 2015 at 5:10pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
The Goblin tossed a woman off a bridge with the intent to kill her.
Spider-Man's intent was to save her but he failed. I see it like someone
shooting you and the doctor making a good-faith error in the ER and
you die on the operating table. The only murderer here is the shooter.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Olav Bakken
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 June 2014
Posts: 241
|
| Posted: 01 June 2015 at 5:30pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
That's the way most people would see it, but Peter probably saw it as the one who was responsible for the final act that killed her even if he tried to save her and she would have died anyway if he hadn't tried. And will then torment himself with ideas that she might had been alive if he had handled it differently. It's a very long time since I read the stuff, but that's how I remember it.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stephen Churay
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 25 March 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 8369
|
| Posted: 01 June 2015 at 7:01pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Yes, I hear stories sometimes how future writers back then
discovered or rediscovered Spider-Man and Fantastic Four and other
titles. It's easy to readers who came later to take them for granted
considering they were already established by then, but it does sound
like they make quite an impression.
=======
it's easy for many current writers to forget what age they were when
they started reading and collecting. If those writers would remember
this, I think, the market may not be as up as it is now, but at least the
future would have a better chance.
Its my opinion that, Right now, there is an influx of older readers
coming in because comics as pop culture is high. Characters or
something resembling them can be seen all over film, games, and
television. What happens when comic book characters and stories are
no longer the belle of the ball? Will the current older readers continue
into there 50's and 60's? Will there be a generation to come behind
them?
For years comics based stories on the illusion of change. Now,
change is the status quo. When asking asking questions like those
above is any thought given to how they destroy the illusion. For me at
least, I read comics as an escape. Adding discussions of taxes paying
for property damage and superheroes being held accountable for
collateral damage, just takes the fun out of reading them. How will the
next generation perceive them?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Kip Lewis
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 March 2011
Posts: 2880
|
| Posted: 01 June 2015 at 7:47pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
That question(the one with Taskmaster) was
made in 1980 comic by David Michelinie and
George Perez. That story gave us a
villain that has withstood the test of
time. Sometimes asking those questions
give us good stories and characters.
Edited by Kip Lewis on 01 June 2015 at 9:52pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15775
|
| Posted: 01 June 2015 at 10:56pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Or all the buzz could have been about the fact that it was actually
Spider-Man himself who killed her while trying to save her, when it was
first assumed she was already dead or was caused by the fall (either by
readers or himself). Which would be hard for Peter when he found out.
Not sure what exactly the discussion was about, but either way the
comics returned to that specific moment years later for some additional
info.
+++++++
That issue is fiendishly brilliant in the controversy it caused, isn't it?
We don't see Gwen get kidnapped. She's seemingly unconscious
during the battle on the bridge. Spider-Man seems to think she's in
shock, but the Goblin knocks her off of the bridge before he can get her
to a hospital.
There's that tiny "snap". The Goblin mockingly concludes that the shock
of the fall killed her. And the story goes on from there.
Now, there's a vague-yet-distinct possibility that she was already dead
even before the battle started, but a twisted egomaniac like the Goblin
would surely have rubbed that in his arch-foe's face.
No, it seems pretty darn clear that Conway's intent (and he's said as
much) was that the "snap" was put in there to torture the readers.
Only WE would know that Spider-Man accidentally killed his own
girlfriend. Neither combatant would be aware of that "snap", which is
why the Goblin claims it was the shock of the fall. As course, as
Stephen notes, the Goblin is still fully responsible for her death.
A letters page in ASM only a few issues later confirmed that the
whiplash effect of the webline was the culprit, but a lot of people
seemed to miss that.
Unfortunately, we've since seen stories in which Peter Parker has
expressed his guilt over accidentally snapping Gwen's neck, which
completely misses the point. He should never know what really
happened, much less confess it to Aunt May! He already has reason
enough to feel guilty (his life as Spider-Man led to her death), and so
Gwen's actual cause of death is just there to torture the readers. Which
was brilliant, until later writers screwed it up.
I still maintain that the death of Gwen Stacy storyline is one of the best
Spider-Man stories ever done, as it powerfully reaffirms what drives
Spider-Man's character--guilt, and doing the right thing for the right
reasons. Unfortunately, everything that came after served to both
tarnish the story and turn it into a definitive line in the sand that no one
could be allowed to forget.
I mean, there's a friggin' "Spider-Gwen" running around, now?!?!
Yeesh. LET HER GO, people!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Kip Lewis
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 01 March 2011
Posts: 2880
|
| Posted: 02 June 2015 at 7:17am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
I could see why people missed the point of the "snap,"
if you consider the age of the reader. Ten or twelve
year olds might not first think about a neck-breaking.
It's not something that's in their body of knowledge. I
could imagine some thought the snap sound was the web
line snapping when stretched out straight.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Dale Lerette
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 March 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 750
|
| Posted: 02 June 2015 at 7:23am | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Totally agreed Stephen. Spider Man was trying to save Gwen. He didn't kill her intentionally. It was an action related to Spider Man's efforts to save Gwen's life from certain death.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Topic Closed)
