For Peter Parker, was it Gwen Stacy or Mary Jane Watson? Some might argue that Peter’s marriage to Mary Jane sucked a lot of the excitement out of the Spider-Man titles, but was it really the marriage itself, or how it was handled?
Doug: Which begs the question — were you (read: any of us) more exciting as a single than as a spouse? Does marriage not offer tribulations, or in this specific case plot points? The answer should be that marriage just brings a different set of dynamics. To me, the fault in the Parker situation was making MJ a supermodel. Money had always been one of Pete’s hang-ups — it wasn’t anymore and that took away a huge antagonistic force working against his personality. Additionally, he’d always been monogamous anyway (from Betty Brant to Gwen to MJ), so I’m not sure what “making it official” really did that put such a creative wall up against the story makers.”
Or how about the Spider-Man titles weren’t any less exciting so much as they were being negatively affected the exact same way that, I dunno, EVERY super hero title was being affected in the 90s and 2000s? And the reasons for that had jackshit to do with him being married?
The fault was making Mary Jane a supermodel because it meant Peter couldn’t have money problems…except for like 2 years into the marriage when she wasn’t a supermodel anymore and was blacklisted and the Parkers were forced to live in Aunt May’s boarding house. Not to mention the fact that, yeah money is a huge hang up for Spider-Man but it isn’t the be all and end all of his character or series jackass.
Honestly did these people actually READ the comics in question? Mary Jane was a supermodel THREE times during the 20 years of the marriage.
She was a model initially when they got married but was only JUST starting to get a good income and make the Parkers upwardly mobile, but that was a creative decision taken primarily to make the impact of LOSING that wealth greater. In other words MJ got a lot of money as a model so it’d hit harder when she and Peter lost all of it.
She modelled maternity clothes during the Clone Saga as a way to give her and Peter cash to leave NYC since they were being written out of the series. She off panel ended that career when Peter was reinstated as the one true Spider-Man.
Then you’ve got the time in the late 1990s when she became a model which was done SOLELY to provide an excuse that she was ‘inappropriate’ and Peter being married to her was ‘unrelatable’. It was a cheap move basically. Under JMS’ run she left modelling for the less high paid, less glamorous role as a theatre actress.
Honestly Peter and Mary Jane were far from financially secure during their marriage and skrimped and saved quite a bit, not that it mattered because again, Peter worrying about paying his rent doesn’t make or break the franchise guys.
This is all besides the fact that in real life models AREN’T that financially secure at all.
As for the monogamous thing I don’t know if the author is criticising the marriage or criticising the fact that it shouldn’t have hindered stories. Regardless the marriage DIDN’T put up any creative walls. The nature of the industry at the time did that, not that there weren’t any good stories during the marriage and not that a lot of them INVOLED the marriage.
JMS’ run, Web of Romance, Sensational Spider-Man Annual #1. All things using the marriage effectively and endearingly so the basic conceit of “it was bad” is bullshit out of the gate.
I shit you not people this is exactly what Marvel was doing to Mary Jane just after OMD and arguably even now. They did it to Mary Jane, early on in the New 52 they were doing it to Lois Lane and now they’re doing it to Black Cat too.
Joe Quesada/Steve Wacker/Dan Slott/Marvel in not-so-many-words