Liliaeth (liliaeth) wrote,

Convo with Dan Slott

Liliaeth, it seems to me that you've looked at these comics with a VERY personal lens and formed opinions and interpretations about this character which-- while they can be passionately debated-- these views of yours probably fall outside the mainstream. I think that's the most politic way to put it. I mean no disrespect-- but the fact that you think (as you said in an earlier post) that Peter WASN'T a loser in high school is a good signpost that you probably aren't going to see eye-to-eye with me and most of the people who've written Spider-Man. Seriously. Next time you're online with another Spider-Writer (DeFalco, Stern, whoever) tell them they're wrong if they think Peter was a loser in high school. I think-- right there-- that's a pretty good litmus test.

Dan Slott to me as part of a convo on newsarma. There was a lot more to it, but I'm not going to bore you guys with it.

And I should be responding again, but...

People might wonder why I'm so against Peter Parker being portrayed as a loser, why I hate it when people like Slott see Peter as a loser in highschool... there's a simple answer.

Because I was Peter in highschool.

Nah, I wasn't a guy, I didn't have this secret of being a superhero, or having superpowers. But I was that kid that couldn't get a date to save her life. I was that kid got bullied throughout most of highschool, who had few or no friends, who liked to sit in the corner with a book and got ridiculed for it. I was that kid who had trouble talking to other kids of the opposite gender. I didn't go to parties and when I did, I was a wallflower. Like Peter.

So basically, mister Slott is calling me and every other kid like me a loser. He's insulting me on a personal level. Yeah, I know that's not what he meant to do, but he's still doing it.

I wasn't a loser, my life might have sucked, but I wasn't a loser and neither was Peter Parker. Up to now, Peter was that nerd, that kid with no luck, no popularity in highschool but with this big secret, this big promise for the future and hope for better. And I wasn't even attractive and a scientific genius like Peter was. It's one thing to look at kids who dropped out of highschool or did drugs, or got drunk all the time, and see them as losers. But a good kid like Peter?

We could look at a guy like Flash as a bit of a loser who reached his top in highschool and it made us feel better for ourselves, because Flash was the popular kid that wasn't us, and look where it got him. (And then look at Flash again and see him overcome that, see him build his life up again and love him for it. )
Only now we have to look at Peter in the same way, because he apparantly reached his top in highschool when he invented webfluid and his webshooters and he never became anything more than that.

In Highschool, he was a good kid with a lot of promise, all of which has gone apparantly unfullfilled, truly making him a loser, the likes of which Dan Slott apparantly finds more interesting than the Peter we had before this.

Before aunt May had a reason to be proud of her nephew, now... what possible reason could she possibly have to be proud of this waste of a man that he's turned into now?

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded