ProjectX2 said:
So, once Peter realizes that all his villains are going to go after his family, he's going to switch sides?
i figure he'll switch after one of them is whacked. or he may persevere, or become the center voice of reason, who knows.
i've thought about the unmasking, and i thinkt hat people haven't really been discussing 2 things. a major topic of discussion is that an unmasked peter goes against what his book was originally about, just as JQ talks about how a married peter goes against what this book was originally like. but i believe a counter to this argument is that Spider-man is a character of innovation. Now, since the comic rennaisance in the 80s that spawned high concept books, it may not seem like it, but Spider-man was always meant to be an atypical hero. Stan Lee wanted it to be a kid, he wanted him to be an everyman, he wanted him to be based after a revulsive creature. He wanted to make Spider-man these things because that is not what characters were like back in the day. And it worked! Spider-man being different was what made him popular. One can argue that him getting married is an extension of experimenting with comics in general through Peter, as many characters still weren't married then.
What I think the unmasking does is help push Spider-man in a direction that has not been taking by the major comic book characters. Spider-man has been kind of tame lately, and I think that's largely due to the acceptance of the status quo. Spider-man's formula works, and thus it is kept the same. But Spider-man is meant to be different than other heros, and if all the other heros nowadays are like Spider-man, Peter is no longer interesting. The unmasking does this. Now some people say, "oh, there are plenty of public superheroes." To this I respond, "Not many, and none of them are as big as Spider-man." The most popular characters go Superman, Batman, Spider-man. The secret identity is very important to all 3 of these characters. Spider-man is the first very major character to go in a public direction. He is once again different.
Another facet of Spider-man's character is perseverance through tragedy. Some say it would be his main character trait. He has survived through tons of loss, all these bad things that are happening to him because he tries to do the right thing, and he keeps on doing the right thing because it is right. To Peter, unmasking himself and trying to legitimize heroes is the right thing to do. It's the responsible thing to do. And yes, he's going to get hammered by villains for it. But for this to happen and for Spider-man to survive it is an integral part of the character. A happy, care-free Spider-man, as much as we all want to see him, is not the best Spider-man for stories.
So these two major points are the reasons I support the unmasking of Spider-man. Change is good when it makes sense (i.e. no spider-wolverine claws due to mystical powers that are weird and cure cancer). In a situation like this, there is a chance Spider-man would do this. Great power, great responsibility.
As a minor note, I'm pretty sure that a majority of Spider-man's more important villains already know his identity. Osborn has known for years, Venom and MacGargan know, and they are on that cover to number 5. Bullseye didn't know, but I think he is on that cover more for coolness factor. These characters could have gone after Spider-man and his family any time in recent history. This is what Millar did in his run of Spectacular. So the New Avengers know, 2 most major villains know (where has Ock gone, btw?), SHIELD knows... Peter's secret identity ain't exactly what it used to be. The issue at hand is more one of the public and Superheroes, as compared to Supervillains and Superheroes.
So those are my reasons. Hurrah.
