But this - hmmm. Other than the origin story, this may just top them all. So, let's look at the questions raised by one of the most significant events EVER in the Spider-Man mythology:

• How could this have happened?

• Is this just a stunt - or a logical direction for the character to go at this time in his history?

• Will it be permanent?

• Does this destroy the character as we know it?

How it Happened
It's all the fault of Civil War.

Or perhaps we should be call it The Event That Ate Marvel, because virtually the entire line has been held hostage to this event, not just to the story elements, but also the back stage bungling that has resulted in chronically late shipments of not just the lead title, but of several other titles, including such flagships as Fantastic Four and Amazing Spider-Man. A summary and review of Civil War itself is beyond this particular article (wait just a little longer, grasshopper), but in a nutshell - the supergroup known as the New Warriors go cruising for supervillains to kick around as part of its superhero reality show, but gets in over its head as one of the bad guys - a slimebag called Nitro (Spidey fans will recgonize him as the antagonist in Spectacular Spider-Man #51 (June 1981) and the villain hired by the Kingpin to take out Norman Osborn in Peter Parker #95 (September 1998)) - detonates himself near a school in Stamford, Connecticut, killing hundreds, including children.

In response to public outcry, Congress draws up the Superhero Registration Act, which will require superheroes to register their identities with the government, and essentially go onto the government payroll (I'm oversimplifying, but bear with me). So far, not too much of a problem, since it seems that everyone in SHIELD knows who Spider-Man is, anyway.

But this is where it gets dicey for our boy Spidey.

In Amazing Spider-Man #529 (April 2006), Tony Stark asks to meet with Peter and Mary Jane over a private dinner, where Tony begins to articulate his fears that a crisis is coming, a crisis so problematic that he does not believe that he can even trust Captain America to do the right thing - but he does think he can trust Peter. He tells him that during their time together in the New Avengers, since he invited Peter, MJ and May to live in Stark Towers after the Parker homestead was burned to the ground back in issue #518 (May 2005), that they have become like family to him. He now wants to hire Peter as his protege, his successor to go with him everywhere - but the price is high. Stark wants a blood oath, that Pete will stick by him, no matter what.

And then Stark promptly rewards this vow by going off by himself to a secret cabal meeting of the Illuminati (New Avengers: Illuminati). But that's not what's important now.

The situation continues to deteriorate as public and congressional fervor for passage of the bill grows, and Stark tells Peter that due to his high profile in taking the lead for the registration act, that he will unmask as Iron Man - but that if Peter wants to continue to work with him - he will have to unmask as Spider-Man.

That sound you hear is Spider-Man's life falling completely apart.

Tony tells him that if he doesn't unmask, then he will be a criminal, and Mary Jane and Aunt May would be considered accomplices, and arrested as well. Tony gives Pete some time to think about it. After a heart to heart discussion with Aunt May and Mary Jane, Peter arrives in Washington and tells Tony the following, which I've quoted from Amazing Spider-Man #532 in its entirety because I don't think it's as effective in the paraphrasing:

"You took us in when we had nowhere to go. You've been good to MJ, and to Aunt May. You stood by us. You've been like - like a father to me. I made a promise that I would stand by you no matter what. I keep my promises, Tony. Do what you have to. I'll back you up. All the way."

The issue ends with the tease - will he or won't he - but the outcome - which was completely BLOWN by Marvel on two occasions (1) by showing an unmasked Peter Parker at a media conference discussing his decision in Thunderbolts #103, which was released the week before Civil War #2 came out, and then (2) revealing the spoiler to the friggin' media that Wednesday morning before the faithful even had a chance to get to their local comic shops and read the story for their bloody selves. Marvel ran ragged on websites that were discussing the reveal the week before, but it was all fine and good for them to release the damned Thunderbolts too early, and then spoil the story themselves later.

Whatever.

The Cult of the "Secret Identity"
As I mentioned earlier, Spidey revealing his identity to the public isn't just the end of an era in his own titles, but it's virtually the abandonment of one of the most cherished facets of the whole superhero gig, the "secret identity." This is such a core part of the superhero mythology that it’s hard to let it go as a matter of principle. If I recall correctly, Spider-Man was one of the last, if not the last, major Marvel superhero to maintain a true secret identity.

It's at the heart of the superhero fantasy and that of the misunderstood hero. It's the perfect metaphor for teenage (and even adult) angst. After all, no one – such as that pretty girl sitting next to me in Mr. Seifert’s American Studies class during freshman year in college – knows how special I really am. She probably just thinks I’m just some nerd.

And of course, the reality? I was just some nerd. As most of us were - and maybe still even are.

But that’s the power of the secret identity. It allows us to persist in the delusion that we are something really special, that there is no one like us. It also allows us to indulge in a fair amount of self-pity and a martyr complex. Ah, the suffering that we must endure because we can never really let anyone see through to our true selves, our real vulnerabilities – because if they did – then they would know how to hurt us. Sometimes a character doesn’t even have to wear a mask to have a “secret identity.” After all, Mr. Spock, one of pop culture’s icons of the alienated tried to keep “secret” from all of those pesky, illogical, irrational humans on the starship Enterprise his own flawed humanity. He did a pretty lousy job, though, as I recall.

And yes, for those who are counting, that was another one of my irritating references to Star Trek.

And although we don't wear literally wear masks in our daily lives, we all have secret identities. Really. How many of you can say that the face you present at work or school is the same you present at home - when your guard is down? Don't a lot of us treat the people we love the worst - simply because we can? You talk to your boss or your professor a lot differently than you do your wife, your kids, or your parents - don't you? Of course you do.

And then there are people with addiction problems desperately trying to keep the rest of the world in the dark about them, homosexuals who maintain a public personna of heterosexuality so that their true orientation will not be discovered, men and women hiding affairs from their spouses, the list goes on and on. The secret identity is something that we can all relate to.

But if we look at it under a microscope (literally and figuratively), the concept of the superhero secret identity doesn't hold up. For one, superheroes for the most part move about the public way too freely and in broad daylight. They aren’t like serial killers who keep to the shadows and strike only intermittently. Their pictures are taken, their voices are recorded, their blood spilled, etc. Science can collect DNA from hair samples, spit, skin, any number of ways. You probably wouldn't have to follow a superhero for very long before you had a chance to collect a DNA sample. Remember when Spidey chucked his costume in the trash in the classic Amazing Spider-Man #50 (July 1967) and JJJ proudly displayed it in his office (this was a key scene in Spider-Man 2 as well)? Peter Parker would have left tons of biological evidence all over that costume. Just the mask would have had enough hair samples to make for a positive DNA match. More than once someone deduced that he had to be from Queens because of (1) his accent or (2) Spider-Man was often seen coming from there. In Amazing Spider-Man #123 (August 1973), Luke Cage, in tracking down Spidey, stated that there were three places he was most often seen at: The Daily Bugle, Empire State University, and an unspecified neighborhood. Wouldn’t take a whole lot of effort to put two and two together from there. And any investigative agency worth its salt would have maintained close surveillance on Peter Parker from the day he started coughing up that plentiful portfolio of exclusive Spider-Man photos. Satellite tracking, heat signatures, voice matching, the methods of identification go on and on.

And we won't even get into the whole thing with Clark Kent's glasses.

No less an authority than Stan Lee himself once expressed a certain amount of ambivalence with the secret identity concept. He stated in the original Origins of Marvel Comics (1974) in his section on the creation of the Fantastic Four "I was utterly determined to have a superhero series without any secret identities. I knew for a fact that if I myself possessed a super power I'd never keep it secret. I'm too much of a show-off. So why should our fictional friends be any different?" Of course, he originally conceived the FF without costumes, but changed his mind on that topic by issue #3.

But then again, so what if the concept of the secret identity isn't realistic? Neither is faster than light travel or time travel based on science and physics as we understand them today (or at least the way I understand them, which mind you, is NOT saying a whole lot). However, in any good science fiction, the FTL travel, for example, whether it's called "warp drive" or "hyper drive," or whether you travel through time using the Guardian of Forever or slingshotting around the sun is really irrelevant (as long as your psuedo-scientific doubletalk at least sounds good) because the crux of the story is not about how you get to your destination - it's what happens when you (and the primary characters) arrive and what is learned or achieved once there. The secret identity is a storytelling device, a prop, but not the fulcrum on which the story usually hinges.

Marvel's Ultimate Universe has always been much more realistic about the "secret identity" concept and government control of super powered people. Peter told Mary Jane the secret very early on, just like any real 15 year old boy would do with his best friend/best girl. The government, specifically Nick Fury, had him under surveillance from the get go. People weren't complete dolts when it came to putting two and two together, such as Eddie Brock Jr., and Curt Connors. And Fury has already told Peter that when he turns 18 - he works for him - and Pete will have no choice. Unfortunately, in my opinion, that “realism” is part of what makes the Ultimate Universe a lot less fun than the regular Marvel Universe. There’s something special about the mythology of superheroes where the hero operates outside the law - which the Ultimate Universe has pretty well eviscerated. There, superheroes are just costumed cops and soilders. Superheroes are best when they are acting because of their own moral compass – not because they’re collecting a paycheck or doing it to stay out of jail.

So, it really doesn't matter that the "secret identity" is bogus. It's always been a part of the tale that we've cheerfully accepted, even as we smugly sneer about how stupid Lois Lane was.

Was the Unmasking Just a Stunt?
First of all, contrary to what many may think - I wasn't against the unmasking of Spider-Man on principle. And I don't think it's out of character. After all, there are reasons for it to be very much in character. And this does present the possibility of exciting new story directions to go into.

However, the way it has shaken out so far - it does seem like a stunt - and one that has not particularly paid off very well in the form of increased interest in Spider-Man and sales of the monthly comics (while Amazing is doing quite well due to the fact that the Civil War wraparound has been gracing every issue lately, Sensational and Friendly Neighborhood are struggling, which is unfair because I think both are good books right now.

Unfortunately, the staggering import and result of Tony's request and Peter's response is poorly handled. While as a standalone story, it's fairly good, it takes too much of a short cut to get to the payoff, a shortcut that given the sheer weight of 45 years of continuity, and the fact that this was an end of an era for Marvel superheroes as we knew them, is completely inexcusable. Like so much of Civil War, too much happened too fast and ran roughshod over the story and the characters involved because Marvel just had to rush a mega crossover event out there to compete with 52 and after watching the sales numbers rack up on Infinite Crisis.

• For one, unless I missed something - the law didn't require heroes to publicly disclose - that was solely Tony's request of Peter. But, why didn't Peter at least discuss that option with Tony? "How about if I register and reveal - but not publicly?" Now, I'm sure Stark would have had an answer - but the question should have been asked and debated. After all, like I mentioned earlier, it's not like half of SHIELD doesn't already know, and virtually every telepath in the Marvel Universe that crosses his path, and anyone who walks into Avengers Tower, and everyone who was there at the climactic battle at the end of House of M - oh yeah I forgot - last year's mega-event which is now yesterday's news. Now, yes, there's a huge difference between that and every single person on the street knowing, particularly all of those guys who want to kill you and eat your brains. But, what I am saying is that considering all that had happened, revealing his identity to the Government (and I realize that there's a big unanswered "just who all in the Government would know"), should not have been that big of a deal to him - and the compromise should at least have been discussed before rushing to the disclosure.

• Demonstrating that everyone at Marvel seems to have short memories, wasn't it discussed just a while ago in that debacle The Other about the need to keep Spider-Man's identity secret - even in death? Let's turn the Wayback Machine all the way, way back to the year 2005, as Mary Jane and Tony are having a discussion over just what to do with the subject of Peter Parker's death after his beating at the hands of Morlun. I quote Tony word for word "For those (of us superheroes) who wear the masks, steps must be taken to ensure that their secret is maintained even after they're gone - to protect their families from enemies who might decide to strike at them as a kind of consolation prize." So - Tony exhibits all of this concern for MJ and May when he thinks Peter is dead - and he's told Peter that he considers them family - but he says nothing about ensuring their well-being after he drops the bomb on Peter that he wants him to unmask? Yes, yes, I know (1) the situation has changed and (2) maybe this was simply understood between the two of them or was discussed off-panel. But that's a cheat.

• Then there's this "Tony Stark as father figure" thing. Frankly, I just don't buy it. Now, it is an understood part of the character's mythology that Peter Parker has a powerful, unspoken longing for a father figure to replace Ben. Well, it's understood to me, I guess. This has been a consistent thread throughout the history that has connected men such as George Stacy, Miles Warren, Joe Robertson, Ezekiel Sims, and even Norman Osborn. But for one, those were all middle aged or older men. How old does Marvel consider Tony Stark to be? Not old enough, I'll bet.

  Let's look at the current casting of the films for an illustration. Robert Downey, Jr., cast as Tony Stark in the upcoming Iron Man film, is 42 years old in 2007 and Tobey Maguire is 32. Now, Maguire is clearly NOT playing Peter Parker as a 32 year old man, but he is a lot closer to Peter's age in the comics, where Pete is either 29 or 30 (Marvel says he's 25 - another load). Looking at comic book Peter and Tony, that seems about the right age disparity. Do Downey and Maguire look like they could have a budding father/son relationship? This was one of the reasons that Nicholas Cage was not chosen for the Norman Osborn role in the first Spider-Man film - he didn't look old enough (and he wasn't) to be a father to James Franco or father figure to Tobey Maguire.

  Plus, there just isn't the shared history between Spidey and Iron Man that there has been between he and some other heroes. During their various team-ups, Iron Man seemed to tolerate him more than having any genuine affection for him. It would have made much more sense for Peter to consider Captain America a father figure (he did once joke that he considered Cap to be a really, really old uncle figure), as he has always been somewhat in awe of Cap, who has dispensed fatherly advice to Spidey more than once in their pre-New Avengers days (for example, Amazing Spider-Man #491 (April 2003)). Not only that, but it was Cap who recruited him into the New Avengers, and it was Cap that he admitted that he "couldn't say no" to. Pete has also known Reed Richards for many years and worked more closely and more often with him than Stark. And Reed is the "father figure" of the Fantastic Four, with Spider-Man often filling the role of the "other brother," comparable to Johnny Storm in terms of age and temperment. And remember when Spidey finally "outed" himself to the Fantastic Four in Spider-Man/Human Torch #5 (July 2005)? Noting his nervousness at introducing MJ and May to the Four, he differentiated it from being with the Avengers as "that's work - these are friends." I'm not saying that Stark and Peter couldn't have become close over time, or have bonded over their mutual interests. And does Peter owe Tony? Yes he does, big time. And well he should. And we'll get into that a little later. But it's asking a lot of fandom to accept that Peter is so close to Stark at this point in time that he would be willing to make such a life altering decision to accommodate him.

• Frankly, this moment doesn't have the power it once would have. The way Marvel has done things lately - Spidey's secret identity revelation, rather than being a big stunner on its own, is just the latest in a series of “Life Altering” events for Spider-Man. I mean, after all, it wasn't even a year ago that he friggin' died! Then there's the weird new powers he got, such as the biological web shooters, stingers, night vision, talking to spiders, etc. that have never really been explored. After more than 40 years he formally joined a superhero team - and only the surface of possibilities was scratched with that. In the last "nothing will ever be the same again" crossover event - he was married to Gwen Stacy and had a son, a life that was brutally ripped from him when events were returned to normal. Each of these events singularly presented the foundation for several good stories, none which have been told. To keep having one "life altering event" right after the other without any time to digest the previous "life altering event" taints them all.

But wait - there's more...Spider-Man, of all superheroes, knew just how catastrophic it could be for others to know his identity.

• First of all - Gwen Stacy died because Norman Osborn knew that Peter Parker was Spider-Man. Regardless of how much "Sins Past" might have retroactively muddied Norman's motivations (and I'm not sure that they did, but that's another story), Norman came to Peter's apartment on that fateful day looking for him and found Gwen. I find it incredible that during all of Peter's pondering about whether to disclose his i.d. - the subject of Gwen never came up. And yes, I've been one of those who has said that there's been enough pining over Gwen Stacy - but this was the man who sat up all night staring at a picture of Gwen just before his wedding, wondering if he was making the right decision. But no one, Peter, MJ, or May, even thought about Gwen for a second before the big reveal.

• Think about how much other misery has been caused by men who knew that Peter was Spider-Man. Of course, most of that misery was caused by a couple of guys with the last name of Osborn. But has Peter so quickly forgotten the events of Marvel Knights Spider-Man #1-12, where Norman solicited Mac Gargan to kidnap Aunt May? I would say that would be a pretty recent memory. And speaking of May - wouldn't it also have occurred to her that Norman also kidnapped her and replaced her with the infamous genetically altered actress? Then there was the whole Clone Saga, which beyond Osborn, there was another misfit by the name of Miles Warren that made Peter's life hell for several months. And Harry Osborn and his "robot parents" plot, which not only made Peter miserable, but the rest of us who had to suffer through that incomprehensibly long and directionless story arc, only to have it completely crap out.

• Matt Murdock - when Murdock was outed as Daredevil in the press, Peter saw first hand just how much more difficult Matt's life became - with the throng of crowds hanging outside his apartment, supervillains coming into his home (as Hyde did spoiling for a fight) and office (as Stilt Man did when he turned over his equipment). During this story arc, Spider-Man swung off stating that he was more determined than ever to keep his identity secret. Matt even lectured Peter for appearing in the open with the other superheroes and letting Reed Richards and Luke Cage in on the secret (although frankly Reed had probably figured it out some time ago but kept it to himself, and considering that Daredevil blurted Peter's name out to Captain America, it isn't unreasonable to assume that he would have accidentally done the same with a man (Cage) who was considerably closer to him).

I have a hard time reconciling the Peter Parker who was so irresponsible that he didn't tell the people he loved, the people who would be most affected by and had the most to lose by his costumed heroics, the truth, while within a very short period of time (relative to comics), he pronounces Tony Stark as his father figure and is willing to compromise his entire life for him. For example, Gwen Stacy should have known how dangerous Norman Osborn could be. Harry Osborn should have been confided in so that Peter could help him deal with all of the turmoil and pain that his and Harry's father's dual identities caused his fragile psyche. And do ya think Peter could have spared Aunt May a little bit of grief by coming clean about the whole Spider-Man/Doc Ock thing?

I do recognize, however, the dramatic limitations of doing everything I suggested. To have dealt with the issue in a reasonably realistic fashion would have been to draw out the decision for six months of issues. But, beyond the Civil War timetable that was already in play - that would have exhausted every reader's patience, including us continuity obsessed fanboys. By the time that would have been over - all of the surprise that did exist would have been sucked dry. Still, it just seems that it could have been handled much better - with a few more, brief nods to the anguish that this very subject has caused Peter over the years.

Why it's not so Hard to Understand
The knock about being "out of character," is an all too often used fanboy response to something we don't like. I've probably done it myself time and again. Rather than really dissect or articulate why we don't like something, or focus on where the storytelling lapses, we just throw our hands up and says "it's out of character. So-and-so would never behave that way." And it's true - when writers get careless, tired, or lazy, a common tactic is to shoehorn a character into a desired story outcome, whether or not it makes sense. But then again, as human beings, we all get careless, tired, and lazy, and do stupid things or make bad choices. Fictional characters wouldn't be immune to such things, either. But I think that there are a number of reasons that Peter would indeed have considered doing something like this - and none are too far-fetched:

• We can't underestimate how influenced that Peter would have been, to have spent so many years as an outsider, to now be considered one of the "good guys." For all of these years he has been desperate for security and acceptance, but it has always eluded him. This was his best, perhaps last chance for it - and he took it. Tony Stark was offering Peter Parker legitimacy in both of his identities. Pete would now have free reign of Stark's labs and technologies and the means of fully embracing his first love - which was scientific research AND be Spider-Man at the same time. And his career as Spider-Man would be officially legitimized. The crux of J. Jonah Jameson's entire smear campaign, that Spider-Man was operating outside of the law - would have been effectively emasculated.

• Another reason would be to end the hold and the fear that Norman Osborn (and for a time, Harry) and Venom, for example, have long held over him. For years, he always wondered when the other shoe would drop, and one or the other would expose him in retaliation for the latest ass-whupping.

• Spidey’s membership in the New Avengers may very well have removed some of the queasy feelings about his i.d. becoming public – since every superhero who showed up there seemed to know who he was. During the reveal in Amazing Spider-Man #533, Stark announces that either casually or as the result of investigation, he has learned the identities of 137 other heroes - so you can figure that he already knew who Spider-Man was long before he joined the New Avengers. I remember being slightly annoyed that there was no "big reveal" when Spidey became an Avenger, but then figured out that it was likely that everyone already knew, particularly through their SHIELD clearances. And as I mentioned earlier, every telepath seemed to know, as well as heroes and villains with keen senses of smell, and even reporters for great metropolitan newspapers (i.e. Ben Urich, and likely Joe Robertson). The list of those who knew the secret seemed to grow exponentially every year. Peter could have reasonably assumed that eventually, he was going to be outed - and it would be better for everyone if he did it himself and gave his family forewarning.

• As far as May's and MJ's safety - they couldn't be any safer than living in a tower where other superheroes lived! Of course, considering that the Chameleon snuck in disguised as Peter himself, and the Man Wolf also barged in (recent issues of Sensational Spider-Man), maybe I should rethink that. As an employee of Stark's, as well as of SHIELD's - Peter's family would be entitled to round the clock protection. AND - May was right when she told Peter that other peoples' families, such as cops and politicians, have to live under the same Sword of Damocles that a superheroes' family would. Plus, it’s apparent that SHIELD and the Federal Government was going to shield (pun intended) registering superheroes from liability during their pre-registration lives, as well as in the future.

  After all, say while Spidey was a New Avenger (pre-Civil War), someone like Electro or the Vulture harms MJ or May. Not only would they have an enraged Spider-Man after them, but do you think that other superheroes would sit it out? A strong and forceful message would be sent out to the underworld about messing with the family of a superhero. Villains would soon realize that by attacking someone's family, they would face the wrath of not just one hero - but a slew of them. But then again, if you go after Spider-Man's family - what's to say that he won't kill you in revenge? We would like to think that Peter Parker would never kill for any reason - but can we honestly say that about any of us - if our buttons were sufficiently pushed? And while Spider-Man may have a code against killing, a teammate such as Wolverine would have no such qualms about exacting final justice for an ally.

• It isn’t like Peter Parker (or even Mary Jane) hasn’t considered this course of action before. Back in Amazing Spider-Man #200, when Harry was at his whackiest and most threatening, she suggested that Peter just go ahead, go to the cops, do it and get it over with.

  In Spectacular Spider-Man #189 (June 1992), as Harry was being led away by the police and threatened to let the world know what he knew about Spider-Man - Spidey said "go ahead - tell them what you know about me. God knows I've dealt with worse."

  During the Clone Saga's “The Trial of Peter Parker,” as Ben Reilly (who was posing as Peter Parker) was on trial for the murder of a police detective (it’s a long story and a very flimsy case), Spider-Man told Kaine (who was the real killer) that he was going to go into the courtroom and reveal who he was and spill everything to keep Ben from going to jail.

• And then sometimes there is just the very human temptation to get everything out in the open and just live with the consequences instead of the fear.

So, I think it is just as easy to argue that Peter had reasons enough to reveal his identity, just as he would have had reasons to continue to keep it secret.

Is it Permanent?
I haven't a clue - you'll have to ask Joey Q. But it should be. I didn't say I wanted it to be permanent. But it should be. Anything less is a dramatic copout. The god Loki returning the "favor" he owed Spider-Man as a result of assisting in the rescue of his daughter in Amazing Spider-Man #504 (April 2004), a massive mindwipe by Dr. Strange, spinning the earth backwards, travelling in time, rebooting the Marvel Universe, Superboy punching through a wall - all of these are out and out cheats. Admittedly, they would be perfectly logical within the context of how the Marvel Universe operates, but they would be dramatically lazy.

But - I wouldn't be surprised at anything Marvel pulled.

Although it raises an interesting question. After all, for the last 25 years, we've been hearing from one creator or another, and relentlessly from Joe Quesada himself, that the marriage of Peter Parker and Mary Jane was a mistake, because it limited the types of stories that could be told and took Spider-Man too far away from his "core" character concept.

AND THIS DOESN'T? This isn't just a dramatic diversion from the so-called core of Spider-Man. This is an absolute shattering of not only that, but the superhero myth as far as Marvel is concerned. Once again, Marvel speaketh with forked tongue.

Which makes me think they'll reverse it. Not now - not in 2008 - but soon after, when the best stories related to the reveal have been told and the writers find themselves boxed into a corner.

I don't know whether I should hope I'm wrong or not. There is so much that can still be done with it. But then again, Marvel hasn't done anything with the results of all of the other "Events."

Does it Destroy the Character of Spider-Man?
Oh, hell no. The character of Spider-Man will survive. The message boards are always full of threads about how such and such destroys the character and by god, so and so is dropping the titles for good. Blah blah blah. If there is anything that we should have learned in all of our years of following this particular character - it isn't one idea or another, or one story or another, that is his greatest enemy - it's consistently bad storytelling - which is always a possibility - that's what we got in the 1990's. THAT will destroy the character. But marrying MJ, Gwen Stacy having Goblin Babies, Clones, revealing his secret identity - the problem has almost never been the idea (o.k., saying that Peter was a clone was bad) - but has almost always been in the execution.

For the moment - I'm willing to give the idea a chance. Let's see where it goes from here.

Back to Spidey Kicks Butt!

Back to the Table of Contents

Write me at MadGoblin

Or join me on the to talk about this article with me and the other inhabitants of the Crawlspace.

Copyright © 1998-2007 J.R. Fettinger. All Rights Reserved. All original content is the exclusive property of J.R. Fettinger. Spider-Man, the Green Goblin and everyone else who appears in the Spider-Man comics is the property of Marvel, and are used in these articles for the purpose of analysis and commentary.