LibriumArcana.Games

I was watching Linkara's 200 episode, which you can catch here, when I was struck by a point Lewis made inbetween all the shouting. It would seem that alot of writers and editors, don't want Peter Parker to grow up. Peter Parker is often written as a teenager, even when he's an adult. This isn't a constant thing and varies from writer to writer, but a case could be made that Peter is never allowed to fully mature and come to grips with his responsibility or overcome his problems for more then a moment. He never completes the passage from teen to adult but is always pulled back.

If this is true, it explains the campaign against Peter's marriage. It explains why someone as bright as Peter Parker (who built mechanical web shooters in his bed room from off the shelf parts and chemically created the webbing it shoots in the same bedroom...) never actually uses his gifts to any great effect. It also explains why Peter is never allowed to keep a well paying job, despite the fact that he's qualified for a number of positions that would give him the flexibility to remain Spiderman. While it's true that Peter was created to be a sort of everyman superhero, who has to deal with everyday problems on top of being a superhero, he's not actually allowed to deal, to overcome and move on.

On the flip side this may be a part of a larger problem in comics that is well known but stubbornly unaddressed. The refusal in the last couple decades to make changes to the status quo unless it's a reversion to an older status quo (much like one more day). Hence the well know and mocked issues with comic books that I kindly ask we not rechew here.

But maybe Lewis (aka Linkara) and myself are seeing things that aren't there. So while I'm chewing on this idea, I have to ask y'all. What do you think? Is Peter Park, Spiderman, kept locked in a artificial childhood? Is this a special problem or an industry wide one?

Everybody's favourite wallcrawler did move on and didgrow up. He married MJ, he got a a real job (okay, as a school teacher, nothing much in the money department, but Peter was never really in this for the big bucks), he even managed to get through one serious marriage crisis during JMS' tenure (and that's ignoring the fact that my knowledge of Spider-Man is spotty at best).
If you want my opinion I say yes, Spidey grew up, and it worked.
Now if you're talking of current Spidey, yes, Marvel is apparently trying to force him back into eternal teenagerdom for some reason.

Ironically Bat's that job and the crisis were all JMS, and I did point out that it varies by writer.

And I did point out that my knowledge of Peter is spotty

I don't know exactly what's changed since then, but have you read the "Big Time" storyline? He actually got a job working for Horizon, a big science outfit, and has proceeded to invent many things with applications both for Spider-man and real-world use.

Frankly no. One More Day was bluntly the final insult and I've refused to buy Spiderman in specific and Marvel in general since. It wasn't the only thing I found openly insulting (civil war, the manner of cap's death, the tragedy that started it, etc) but it was the straw that broke the camel's back. I'm unlikely to come back until Peter and Mary Jane are married again.

Ah. Well, it did address a number of the issues you mentioned.

Yeah, I pretty much dropped Spiderman after OMD too. I liked the relationship, I liked the fact that it was unique in comics.

There are ways to grow characters without losing their core elements. Tony Stark of today is a fairly different animal than the Tony Stark of the original Iron Man debut. Yet he's still plagued with hubris and dancing up to and over the lines with regards to how he applies his capabilities and powers.

It smells of lazy writing to me.

"Oh! He's single now! We can have him be a bachelor and play the field! This is fertile new ground that has never been covered in comics!"