|
Post by Ozymandias on Jun 6, 2014 12:09:45 GMT
You weren't asking me, but I think you have the timetable all wrong I already told you, a good deal of posts ago, that Sins Past is supposed to take place between ASM #118 and 119. Time to get a notebook and a pen, bro!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 12:42:06 GMT
I'm on board with that, what was peter and gwens relationship like around 61.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 12:55:29 GMT
You weren't asking me, but I think you have the timetable all wrong I already told you, a good deal of posts ago, that Sins Past is supposed to take place between ASM #118 and 119. Time to get a notebook and a pen, bro! I'm not sure he haS , the Gwen confronting Norman happened between ASM #118 AND 119 but the other stuff could have happened before, i remember reading someone who had an idea how it fit in, i try and find it.
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jun 6, 2014 12:58:30 GMT
Ideas about further modifying the character's history?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 13:11:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jun 6, 2014 15:34:28 GMT
I gave that link a look and it was, indeed, a long list of modifications to the original work. Please note that, to modify a story, you don't need to change the lines of text itself. Untold Tales, for example, did a lot of "in between the lines" alterations. For an unadulterated version of Gwen's character, as originally presented, stay tuned to the "Chameleonic Gwen" thread.
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jun 6, 2014 16:54:28 GMT
I ALSO went back and checked out #61 and if we are going to stick to canon, then this would be good to add to the story. Coincidentally, the short-lived Spectactular Spider-man Magazine came out, and in 1968 SSM #2, right around the time of #61 came out with a story about the Green Goblin! It actually looks like a logical insertion in the Spidey timeline. After #61, Norman was on shaky mental ground, and this SSM story follows right into this timeline. So during the events of THIS story, my story idea can be inserted right along with this Goblin story! This story is reprinted in ASM Annual #9, and if you check out the first page you will see that it is mentioned that it originally was in the SSM #2 magazine from 1968! It's almost as if they wrote it for me to use!! The events related in that magazine take place after ASM #67. More or less. To explain, in ASM #66 we see Osborn finally relapsing into his GG persona, following the problems which originated at the end of ASM #61. We also see Peter selling his bike, which he still rides in the magazine. In SSM #2, Harry and Norman are see together, yet in ASM #66 Peter accompanies Harry, in search of his father. Osborn had not been seen in ASM #64 or 65, but that's a continuous story. The first break is in #66. So, where does it fit exactly, SSM #2? Nowhere, this is the best attempt: - Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #66 1-5:3
- Spectacular Spider-Man Magazine #2 1-17:1
- Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #66 5:4-10:4
- Spectacular Spider-Man Magazine #2 17:2-20:2
- Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #66 10:5 - 14:3
- Spectacular Spider-Man Magazine #2 20:3 - 25:5
- Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #66 14:4-20
- Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #67
- Spectacular Spider-Man Magazine #2 26 - 58
A very convoluted reading order, which doesn't explain the fact that Harry was searching for his father, in ASM #65. If there's so much trouble, placing a single issue in continuity, imagine a story like Sins Past, which spans for months and includes a pregnancy and international travel. It can't be done.
|
|
|
Post by dav on Jun 6, 2014 19:40:15 GMT
Very interesting article! It's also nice to know that someone else feels the same way we do regarding all this stuff, like Norman coming back etc. I read the first 1/3 and skimmed the rest but his assessment is pretty much in line with how I saw it as well.
I do intend on reading the rest later today!
|
|
|
Post by dav on Jun 6, 2014 20:14:43 GMT
I ALSO went back and checked out #61 and if we are going to stick to canon, then this would be good to add to the story. Coincidentally, the short-lived Spectactular Spider-man Magazine came out, and in 1968 SSM #2, right around the time of #61 came out with a story about the Green Goblin! It actually looks like a logical insertion in the Spidey timeline. After #61, Norman was on shaky mental ground, and this SSM story follows right into this timeline. So during the events of THIS story, my story idea can be inserted right along with this Goblin story! This story is reprinted in ASM Annual #9, and if you check out the first page you will see that it is mentioned that it originally was in the SSM #2 magazine from 1968! It's almost as if they wrote it for me to use!! The events related in that magazine take place after ASM #67. More or less. To explain, in ASM #66 we see Osborn finally relapsing into his GG persona, following the problems which originated at the end of ASM #61. We also see Peter selling his bike, which he still rides in the magazine. In SSM #2, Harry and Norman are see together, yet in ASM #66 Peter accompanies Harry, in search of his father. Osborn had not been seen in ASM #64 or 65, but that's a continuous story. The first break is in #66. So, where does it fit exactly, SSM #2? Nowhere, this is the best attempt I've seen: 066.500 | Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #66 1 - 10:4 | 066.600 | Spectacular Spider-Man Magazine #2 1 - 20:2 | 066.700 | Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #66 10:5 - 14:4 | 066.800 | Spectacular Spider-Man Magazine #2 20:3 - 25:5 | 066.900 | Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #66 15 - 20:1 | 067.500 | Amazing Spider-Man (Vol. 1) #67 | 067.600 | Spectacular Spider-Man Magazine #2 26 - 58:6 |
A very convoluted reading order, which doesn't explain the fact that Harry was searching for his father, in ASM #65, or that Peter was riding his bike after selling it. If there's so much trouble, placing a single issue in continuity, imagine a story like Sins Past, which spans for months and includes a pregnancy and international travel. It can't be done. If stretch and compress the timeline which is done all the time, this storyline does fit quite well with a few modifications that don't affect the overall storyline. Spiderman: Blue jumped around like a ping pong ball with the timeline but it was still a good story, and people accepted the "liberties" that Loeb and Sale took with the timeline. Ozy, in order to get rid of Sins Past, which already messes with the timeline, there will need to be a few other liberties taken with the timeline. This story idea does not stray too far from the timeline and keeps the details and continuity of Spiderman canon pretty much intact. You also have to acknowledge that even before this, there were inconsistencies in the timeline and retcons that were made. Go back and check the Frederick Foswell timeline. You will find inconsistencies dropped plotlines and other fun stuff, including his interactions with the Green Goblin. Even in the pre '84 period, there are STILL flaws. #200 sticks out in my mind the most. If the timeline was in any way accurate the burglar would have been in his seventies and most definitely not a match for even a non super powered Peter. Ya gotta be a little flexible, bro!
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jun 6, 2014 20:47:07 GMT
I have no problem reading SSM#2, for me it just goes after ASM #67. That's my reading order, it's not perfect, but it keeps in line the most important elements of the story. And of course continuity had problems before 1984, just not so many, and not so blatant. The most evident problem with the MU from the 90's to the present day has been aging. Before 1984, characters had slowed the aging process, but you could always see them being older than in past stories. In the 90's that stopped being the case. Also, historical events like the Vietnam war, had to be changed for "some unspecified overseas conflict". This are the things I would do without.
As for retconning Sins Past, I just advocate for the simpler of ways to do it (with no alteration of the timeline). Remember that a retcon is a form of lying, and lies have to be kept as simple as possible. Is in the details that you get caught,
|
|
|
Post by dav on Jun 6, 2014 21:01:21 GMT
By the way Ozy, I wrote this proposal FOR you to do away with Sins Past. When me and Tiger were batting ideas around we were working within Sins Past. You can't have it both ways. You either get Sins Past without small adjustments to continuity, or we resolve Sins Past WITH these adjustments. Unless you have some better ideas, You're gonna have to work with us.
|
|
|
Post by dav on Jun 6, 2014 21:32:40 GMT
I have no problem reading SSM#2, for me it just goes after ASM #67. That's my reading order, it's not perfect, but it keeps in line the most important elements of the story. And of course continuity had problems before 1984, just not so many, and not so blatant. The most evident problem with the MU from the 90's to the present day has been aging. Before 1984, characters had slowed the aging process, but you could always see them being older than in past stories. In the 90's that stopped being the case. Also, historical events like the Vietnam war, had to be changed for "some unspecified overseas conflict". This are the things I would do without. As for retconning Sins Past, I just advocate for the simpler of ways to do it (with no alteration of the timeline). Remember that a retcon is a form of lying, and lies have to be kept as simple as possible. Is in the details that you get caught, The way I see it is the Sins Past stuff and my story stuff could fit in between #62 and #66, and despite the inconsistencies SSM #2 looks like it would fit in between #67 and #68, except for pages 1-5 happening between #62 and #66 as well. As for aging, yes if you binge-read many issues then the age issue would be prevalent, but to read one month at a time the changes are much more subtle, just like the changes in the personalities of the characters. Younger readers may like modern MJ, but if they go back to pre#121 they wouldn't even recognize her.
Honestly Ozy, I don't see any simpler way of retconning Sins Past, and your idea of creating a fork in the timeline in 1984 is FAR from leaving the timeline unaltered! You're talking about creating a whole new universe! That is NOT a simpler way!
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jun 6, 2014 21:35:27 GMT
I already outlined it to you almost at the beginning of the thread. On page 2:
Simply by saying that Norman tried to seduce Gwen and failed, so he made it all up to mess with Peter. He forged the letter, used genetic material to create the babies, brainwashed MJ to think she remembered what had never happened, whatever. What, in that simple plot, needs elaborating?
Unless you're wondering about how that helps, in bringing her back. It doesn't, that's just the non-intrusive, Sins Past retcon.
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jun 6, 2014 21:38:14 GMT
Honestly Ozy, I don't see any simpler way of retconning Sins Past, and your idea of creating a fork in the timeline in 1984 is FAR from leaving the timeline unaltered! You're talking about creating a whole new universe! That is NOT a simpler way! Didn't you prefer to talk about that in the companion thread?
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jun 6, 2014 21:50:12 GMT
Very interesting article! It's also nice to know that someone else feels the same way we do regarding all this stuff, like Norman coming back etc. I read the first 1/3 and skimmed the rest but his assessment is pretty much in line with how I saw it as well.
I do intend on reading the rest later today!
I'm going to extract the key points in that article (from my POV). How in the hell do you retroactively work out the timeline of all of this? When did Gwen sleep with Norman? During what time span was she pregnant? When did she have the kids? Why didn’t she ever show? When would she have been gone for such an extended period of time to have the kids?
Frankly, I can’t do it.
[…]
Look - when Stan Lee and John Romita, Sr. (followed by Gerry Conway) originally wrote these stories, Gwen did not have sex with Norman Osborn, she did not get pregnant, she did not go to France for an extended period of time and she did not give birth to two children. It didn’t happen. With this part, I can agree. Now comes a small statement that may seem fair, but is actually a way out, in anticipation of any possible attack on his argument: When I like the story, it works. When I don’t like it, it doesn’t, and it’s blasphemy.
And finally, let's see how he attempts to fit Sins Past in the continuity. I'm not going to discuss his reasoning, for the plausibility of Gwen having sex with Norman, I'm just going to discuss his timeline:
After an analysis of all of the applicable events, I believe that the accidental consummation of Gwen and Norman’s relationship took place between Amazing Spider-Man #61-64, and the birth of the twins between issues #93 and 98. Go and take a look at ASM #512, page 11, panel 1. The conception of the babies took place 7 months before ASM #121 (she came to attend to Harry just after having them). If we take the 4 months she spent in France, between ASM #118 and 119 [sic], that only leaves 3 months. For almost 5 years of publication? Not buying it.
|
|