Update: The title of this has been changed after a civil conversation with reader xmenexpert. To see the conversation, click here.

Dan Slott is incredibly proud of the Superior Spider-Man, both as a hero and in regards to sales. And why not? It’s his creation. And to top it all off, he has plenty of fans who tell him at comic conventions how much they love the book. But that still doesn’t change the fact that one could arguably call Doc Ock the Superior anti-Semite.

Quite a charge, is it not? Is Doctor Octopus an anti-Semite, or was his actual end game “just” to kill six billion people (all the Jews included)?  Let us revisit the “Ends of the Earth” storyline, shall we?

“But the human race is resilient and the first thousand or so who climb out of the wreckage … they’ll rebuild. Life will go on, and they’ll remember me. For that new society I shall live on in infamy — a mass murderer worse than Pol Pot, Hitler, and Genghis Khan combined!” (Doctor Octopus).

Spider-Man Doctor Octopus

Here’s a little history lesson from the Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., to demonstrate just how evil of a man Otto would have to be to transcend Hitler, Pol Pot and Ghenghis Khan combined.

German SS and police murdered nearly 2,700,000 Jews in the killing centers either by asphyxiation with poison gas or by shooting. In its entirety, the “Final Solution” called for the murder of all European Jews by gassing, shooting, and other means. Approximately six million Jewish men, women, and children were killed during the Holocaust — two-thirds of the Jews living in Europe before World War II.

Got that? Doc Ock had a “Final Solution,” but it involved being a “superior” version of Hitler; he would implement a plan that would in effect kill all of the Jews instead of just those residing in Europe. And now he’s Spider-Man. In Peter Parker’s body. In fact, he’s Dan Slott’s Spider-Übermensch.

Kind of sick, isn’t it? And the only retort Dan Slott and his fans could possibly have is that Otto didn’t want to kill millions of Jews — he “merely” wanted to kill six billion people, which would just so happen to include all the Jews.

Silly me. The guy who “just” came within inches of an extinction level event because he hated all of humanity is now housed in Peter Parker’s body. And fans “love” the story. It’s what brought them back to the book. Congrats Mr. Slott, those are the kinds of winners I want giving me high fives and pats on the back at comic conventions…

With that said, it is also important to once again revisit how on earth Marvel fans could get a run-of-the mill genocidal maniac swinging around New York City in Peter’s body. Mr. Slott’s recent Newsarama interview gives the answer.

Nrama: With Superior Spider-Man, you’re writing Doc Ock as a lead character for really the first time, and a more long-term Doc Ock story than has really been seen before. We’re seeing the character put in very different situations, interacting with totally different characters. What kind of task has that been — approaching his mindset and his attitude in the position of a lead character?

Slott: He’s trying his best to be a hero, but he’s doing it in a very Doc Ock way. And Doc Ock’s an egotistical, annoying sh*t. It makes him an interesting character. At his core, he’s someone we don’t really think of heroic. But is he any more annoying than [former villain] Hawkeye used to be?

Hmm. Good question. Is Hawkeye “more annoying” than Otto, or has Mr. Slott’s moral relativism inadvertently produced Marvel’s first genocidal maniac superhero? Let me revisit the Holocaust Memorial Museum one more time:

The Nazis frequently used euphemistic language to disguise the true nature of their crimes. They used the term “Final Solution” to refer to their plan to annihilate the Jewish people. It is not known when the leaders of Nazi Germany definitively decided to implement the “Final Solution.” The genocide, or mass destruction, of the Jews was the culmination of a decade of increasingly severe discriminatory measures. …

After the June 1941 German invasion of the Soviet Union, SS and police units (acting as mobile killing units) began massive killing operations aimed at entire Jewish communities. By autumn 1941, the SS and police introduced mobile gas vans. These paneled trucks had exhaust pipes reconfigured to pump poisonous carbon monoxide gas into sealed spaces, killing those locked within. They were designed to complement ongoing shooting operations.

Question for Dan Slott: What issue did Hawkeye triumphantly declare that he would be remembered as a worse murderer than the guy who deployed gas vans to exterminate Jews? Just asking. Was that an annual, or a Comic Con exclusive?

Does a character go from wanting to transcend Hitler, Pol Pot, and Genghis Khan in terms of perpetuating pure evil upon the entire world to a “hero” just because a really good guy beamed his life story and “with great power comes great responsibility” into his head? Probably not. And since we’re talking about the Superior Spider-Man — the guy who blew a defenseless criminal’s face off — Magic 8 Ball says “Why would you ask me such a dumb question?”

Superior Spider-Man is an abomination. It’s an insult to Stan Lee, long-time Peter Parker fans and anyone with a shred of respect for the character. Sales may be fine for Superior Spider-Man, but history will not treat the book kindly. One day a group of editors with a working moral compass will be at the helm of the Spider-Man books and they will look back at this era and ask, “What were they thinking?”

The end of the book can not come soon enough, and the ‘Ends of the Earth’ arc tells us why.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The Holocaust image that was previously here has been removed after reflecting on the request of a reader named Rogue. You can view her comment here. If Dan Slott had acted like an adult from the very beginning and demonstrated half the intelligence and grace as Rogue, it is very likely the picture would have been removed in May.

Update: Here is an email I received from a reader disagreeing with the decision to remove the photo:

  • “I think Rogue is way off on the sensationalism and especially the testosterone rationale. It is important to show what Slott so casually put in his dialogue and inside Spider-Man’s head. I agree they are real people with no voice, I agree it was horrible, I agree it’s grisly — but it was Slott who betrayed their legacy — and that needs to be shown. Obviously his own grandfather’s story didn’t keep Slott from writing a tasteless story with an iconic hero, so maybe that image drove it home. I respect Rouge’s opinion, but I wouldn’t have changed it. It was Slott who inserted this awful chapter of history into the comic,” (douglasernstblog.com reader).

Removing the image was an incredibly tough choice for me. The reader accurately sums up my feelings on the issue, but in this instance I think removing the image sends a more important message: How you conduct yourself with those with whom you have fierce disagreements will often determine the amount of progress you make towards finding an amicable solution.

Related: Dan Slott, absent a superior argument, now sics Twitter followers on critics

Update: Dan Slott has called me a “bad” person and “immoral” for writing this blog post. He then was so incensed that I’m able to tactfully defend my decision that he requested the moderator close out the thread. In Dan Slott’s mind, asking if a character who wanted to transcend Hitler, Pol Pot and Ghengis Khan in terms of evil perpetrated upon the world is the same thing as accusing Dan Slott of being anti-Semetic. Reasonable people can separate the two, but Dan Slott can’t. That’s why he sticks to forums where he can control the moderators and count on his devoted fans to verbally attack. His moral relativism has warped his mind so badly that he now puts my soul on equal terms with real life dictators and despots. Telling.

Update II: Dan Slott is upset that the moderator at Comic Vine put him in his place, so now he’s trying to send his 39,000 followers here to give me grief. Welcome! Here’s the abridged version for some of you:

What Dan Slott doesn’t get (in some sense because moral relativism has warped his mind), is that this post points out the obvious — it doesn’t matter what Dan Slott’s intentions are if the end result is that a monster worse than Hitler is in Peter Parker’s body.

How fitting that only 48 hours after my "Beautiful Music Monday" on Facebook, featuring Schindler's List, Dan Slott would call me "immoral" for writing this blog post. That's okay, Dan, there are many, many others that can see why making a man who wanted to transcend the world's most notorious dictator the new Spider-Man is so wrong.
How fitting is it that after my June 10 “Beautiful Music Monday” on Facebook, featuring Schindler’s List, that Dan Slott would call me “immoral” on June 13 for writing this blog post. That’s okay, Dan. There are many, many others that can see why making a character who wanted to transcend the world’s most notorious dictator into the new Spider-Man is an abomination.
At one time Marvel had heroes who punched out Hitler on the cover. Now, with Dan Slott's Superior Spider-Man, fans have a "hero" who wanted to transcend Hitler in terms of successfully bringing forth murder and mayhem. Congratulations, Marvel. I'm glad "sales" are doing so well for you. It's just fascinating you can still look at yourself in the mirror. "With great power comes great responsibility." Just because you can write a particular story, it doesn't mean you should. I guess Dan Slott missed that lesson when he was reading Spider-Man as a kid.
At one time Marvel had heroes who punched out Hitler on the cover. Now, with Dan Slott’s Superior Spider-Man, fans have a “hero” who wanted to transcend Hitler in terms of successfully bringing forth murder and mayhem. Congratulations, Marvel. I’m glad “sales” are doing so well for you. It’s just fascinating that you can still look at yourself in the mirror. “With great power comes great responsibility.” Just because you can write a particular story, it doesn’t mean you should. Maybe Dan Slott missed that lesson when he was reading Spider-Man as a kid.

 

It’s April 18, 2014 — almost a year after this post was written — and Dan Slott is still obsessing over it. That’s what you call hitting a nerve. Deep down, he knows that my reasons for writing this piece were spot on.
It’s April 18, 2014 — almost a year after this post was written — and Dan Slott is still obsessing over it. That’s what you call hitting a nerve. Deep down, he knows that my reasons for writing this piece were spot on.

Dan Slott YouTube 2

Reply to Dan Slott

Dan Slott YouTube 3

Dan Slott YouTube SSM Silver Surfer

Dan Slott YouTube meltdown

Dan Slott YouTube service reply
Dan Slott wants people to believe I’m “deceptive,” a “weasel,” and someone who is an evil master of “semantics,” but yet I’m also “stupid,” “insane” and incapable of capturing nuance. Which is it? The truth is, he knows I’m highly intelligent. He’s admitted as much on CBR, where he said something along the lines of: “You know exactly what you’re doing.” Here’s the truth: Dan Slott does not think I am stupid — he thinks other people are stupid. Follow his Twitter feed and you will soon see evidence of this, as it manifests itself in his political tweets. Essentially, people are so stupid that they need 535 elitist masters in the nation’s capital to control every aspect of their lives.
Advertisements

About the Author Douglas Ernst

I'm a former Army guy who believes success comes through hard work, honesty, optimism, and perseverance. I believe seeing yourself as a victim creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. I believe in God. I'm a USC Trojan with an MA in Political Science from American University.

39 comments

  1. I would argue Ock’s not anti-Semitic. He has no problem with Jews. Rather, at the time of Ends of the Earth, he was simply insane. He was dying, and he decided he wasn’t going to die alone. He was going to take as many people with him as he could, regardless of their race, religion or creed. Calling him anti-Semitic makes it seem like he wanted Jews to die. But I don’t think he actually looked at the billions who would die as belonging to any particular groups. He looked at them as just one big mass of humanity, all the same, and all pathetic fools who didn’t deserve life as much as he did.

    No question he’s a horrible person. He’s a monster. However, being forced to relive Peter’s memories changed him. He’s now trying to be heroic. He actively regrets his previous actions, especially after issue 8, where he saw a little girl harmed by his global warming scheme. He wants to balance the books.

    Again, not to say he’s become a noble person. He hasn’t. He murdered Massacre in cold blood. He nearly killed Vulture, Screwball and Jester. He’s spying on the entire city with his spider-bots. These are not heroic acts. And I don’t think we’re actually supposed to be cheering for him. This is his redemption story, but I don’t know if it’s actually about him redeeming himself, as much as it is about him seeing it as redeeming himself. And I think we’re still supposed to be waiting for his inevitable fall, and to be glad when it comes.

    1. Xmenxpert,

      Very well articulated. I agree with you in that I don’t think a hatred of Jews drove him, but I wrote the piece to corner Dan Slott’s fans into admitting just how horrible Otto is. Like I said, the only retort is essentially: “Oh, well, he actually only came within inches of incinerating six billion people, which also would include all the Jews. But he’s not a Jew-hater per se, so I guess that makes him a better guy.”

      Dan Slott acts as if people who are upset with this direction have no justifiable reason for feeling that way. He mocks fans and goes out of his way to annoy them. There was an infinite number of ways a story of Doc Ock’s redemption could have been told, but Mr. Slott chose to do so in a way that severed off many long time readers. I see no reason for that to have occurred.

      What’s worse is Slott’s moral relativism. It allows him to say with a straight face that Hawkeye’s annoying characteristics are comparable to Otto’s, or that Ock could be a hero because Wolverine is a hero. It’s sad and bizarre that he would even say such things.

    2. I’m not sure Moral Relativism is the correct word to describe the situation. No person is saying that the action of mass murder is not okay for in one situation, but totally fine in another situation.

      Doc Ock is now Spider-Man, and is apparently trying to be a better hero than Peter Parker ever was. Ock’s take on what that means may be much more violent and darker than Peter Parker’s take, but things like killing a serial killer or putting down the Vulture hard for using children are arguably moral acts.

      I wouldn’t say Moral Relativism is being espoused, though certainly the line separating us from Moral Relativism may be fine; instead, it’s more an acknowledgment that is long overdue in a lot of comic books, which is that it is not always clear what it means to be the “good guy”, that what is “moral” is debatable and sometimes is determined by luck and the evolution of events rather than intrinsic properties. Maybe being soft toward a bad guy makes him change his ways. Maybe being soft means he goes on and murders thirty more people. Moral Absolutism works in some cases, but not all cases; life just isn’t that simple.

      Anyhow, I find it a little obnoxious that you spend much of the article talking about Anti-Semitism, when you freely admit in the comments that you don’t actually believe that. You realize that Anti-Semitism is a pretty serious thing, right? I mean, you went to great lengths to quote from the Holocaust Memorial Museum.

      I feel you are attention-whoring without reason (with reason is sometimes okay), and spitting on the graves of the Jews in the process by cheaply using the analogy without truly meaning it. Yes, Ock proposed genocide. Call it that. You somehow seem to think that calling Ock an Anti-Semite somehow makes it more inflammatory. I find that quite ludicrous that you are just nearly suggesting that killing Jews is somehow worse than killing almost everybody (which includes all the Jews).

      I’m sorry—I get the point you’re trying to make—but you do it in an extremely obnoxious way. Please refrain from the cheap bull**** and do some real writing? There are real and complex moral issues that ought to be discussed about Ock aspiring to genocide like the world has never seen to then becoming a hero. It strikes me as quite brilliant in a morally philosophical way, even if Slott is doing it unintentionally. This comic book might be going somewhere morally challenging: Historically, the hero is a horrible person, yet now he is given a new body and identity and his actions are (arguably) moral. What does that mean about the kind of person we are reading about if he continues down this path?

    3. So you “get” what I’m doing but then you question why I allotted the time I did to buttressing the post with hard facts about the Holocaust? That makes sense. Dan Slott is doing something “brilliant” … even if it’s “unintentionally” brilliant? That makes sense. Look at the intellectual pretzels you’re having to twist yourself into in order to attack me and defend Dan Slott. It’s rather amusing.

      It seems as though I’m “obnoxious” to you, Mr. Anonymous, not because I am actually obnoxious, but because this post shines a big bright light on what Dan Slott has done. And so, all you’re left with is to say I’m “attention whoring” and “spitting on the Jews.” No, sir. I am acutely aware of history, and that is exactly why I find it repulsive that a character who wanted to transcend Hitler in terms of death and destruction is now donning the true Spider-Man’s mask.

      Have fun trying to demonize me. It won’t work. I can actually defend myself here. I’d do so at Newsarama, but the last time I made an attempt they banned me for tactfully defending myself. And then they just stopped anyone from commenting in the thread when others began standing up for me. Telling.

    4. Is it really necessary to call Spider-Man/Doc Ock an anti-Semite? Yes, as one who aspires to be extremely genocidal he is worse than trash and does not merit being worthy of the Spider-Man identity. But nowhere in any of your examples does Doc Ock mention any Jews. I find naming of Doc Ock/Superior Spider-Man as an anti-Semite unnecessary and misleading, as I thought Ock had specifically targeted the Jews.

    5. Mr. Anonymous,

      You must have a problem reading the headline, as it’s posed as a question. And then, even in the text no such thing is stated as a definitive statement. Note: “But that still doesn’t change the fact that one could arguably call Doc Ock the Superior anti-Semite.”

      From there, just a few of the horrors of Hitler’s Nazi Germany are told in order to give SSM readers some perspective since — again — Dan Slott’s Dock Ock is on record saying he wanted to transcend Hitler in terms of evil perpetrated upon the world. Indeed, an extinction-level event (i.e., killing everyone) is “worse” than “merely” killing all the Jews. That’s why it’s so disgusting that such a character snatched Peter Parker’s body and has taken up the mantle of Spider-Man.

      I’m sorry if the point of the post escapes you.

  2. I’m one of the people who you described in your piece about fans not respecting Slott. Since Quesada effectively ended the Spider Man mythos in OMD (which after I cancelled my subscription), I have kept up with Marvel’s demolition of the character from afar. I’ve flipped through the subsequent releases in the bookstore and read blogs like Spider Man Crawlspace. I feel like I’ve lost a good friend and his killer is flaunting his dead and bloodied carcass in front of me.

    The reason ASM flopped to <50,000 per issue is because Slott destroyed Peter Parker's character. He just couldn't write a morally just, flawed, yet attempting to hold on to principles character because he as a person is a bloated, entitled, morally relativistic, self conscious little man. So he then literally kills Peter Parker and we get Superior Spider Man, which is an ironic title of the worst kind. I hear that the sales have stabilized around 80,000 per issue, which is anything but phenomenal from the heyday of Spider Man. But if that's where they're willing to keep sales while beating their character and his legacy into the ground, so be it.

    I hope Marvel tanks (which they won't with Disney propping them up and the movie money). They're infested with the worst kind of cloistered liberalism and secularism. And their stories suck because of it.

    1. The reason ASM flopped to <50,000 per issue is because Slott destroyed Peter Parker's character. He just couldn't write a morally just, flawed, yet attempting to hold on to principles character because he as a person is a bloated, entitled, morally relativistic, self conscious little man.

      You just nailed it. ASM lost a lot of fans in the aftermath of OMD/BND, and then the stories continued to stink. Dan Slott’s solution? Kill Peter. And now, instead of admitting failure he makes a genocidal maniac Spider-Man. One week Otto is moments from incinerating 6 billion people, the next he’s donning Spider-Man’s mask. Sad.

    2. Superior Spider-Man is an abomination. It’s an insult to Stan Lee, long-time Peter Parker fans and anyone with a shred of respect for the character. Sales may be fine for Superior Spider-Man, but history will not treat the book kindly. One day a group of editors with a working moral compass will be at the helm of the Spider-Man books and they will look back at this era and ask, “What were they thinking?”

      This is the absolute best summation of Superior Spider-Man there is. This is just…wonderful. Brilliant piece.

    3. Thank you for the kind words, TheOrangeMask. I appreciate it.

      You do realize that you have set yourself up for Dan Slott’s fans to call you “obnoxious,” right? Indeed, I can see where it would be “obnoxious” to people with a warped moral compass to be called out on their moral relativism. When they lash out, you know you’ve struck a nerve…

      Again, thanks for reading.

  3. Douglas, would you also say that editor Steve Wacker is promoting anti-Semitism by editing Superior Spider-Man? Could you also say Axel Alonso is promoting anti-Semitism by approving the changes to Spider-Man?

    Did Kurt Busiek and Fabian Nicieza promote anti-Semtism by trying to show a similar redemptive arc in Thunderbolts for Baron Zemo, who is clearly a Nazi, far more than Doctor Octopus? Did Tom Brevoort promote anti-Semitism when he edited Thunderbolts? Did Bob Harris, the editor in chief of Thunderbolts, promote anti-Semitism when he approved that story line?

    Are you just as revolted by the redemptive arc of Baron Zemo in Thunderbolts (retroactively) as you are by the current story in Superior Spider-Man?

    1. Greg, since the point of this post went over your head I’ll explain it to you. And yes, even though it’s spelled out in a previous comment I’ll do so again — just for you.

      The point of posing the question as I did was to get people to think about just how evil Doc Ock is. We lose the proper context when Dan Slott says dumb things along the lines of “Well, is Ock any less annoying thank Hawkeye?” The character — written by Dan Slott — asserted he wanted to transcend Hitler in terms of evil perpetrated on the world. I then chronicled just a tear drop’s worth of the evil foisted upon the world by the Nazi’s, which would then give readers a barometer with which to gauge just how evil Otto is — and just how ridiculous Dan Slott is for asking such questions.

      As I’ve said before, there was an infinite number of ways that Dan Slott could have gone about telling a story of redemption when it comes to Doc Ock that didn’t involve slaughtering Peter Parker and making a mockery out everything he stood for. And, at this point, there is no evidence to suggest that Ock has reformed (e.g., blowing Massacre’s face off when he was unarmed), will reform or really has any intention of reforming. I’m not sure how that’s even possible given that fact that he is a body snatcher…

      And finally, as I’ve said before, in the vast majority of cases you can not be redeemed in this world until you have paid in full for your crimes, both legally and spiritually. I have seen evidence of neither in SSM. Does the rule of law not exist in the Marvel universe? Doc Ock probably has about 5,000 crimes against humanity to answer for, and the last time I checked he was never brought before an international court for coming within inches of exterminating 6 billion people. Is there a statute of limitations or loophole I’m missing that says when you kill a man and snatch his body and mind that the role you played in a near extinction-level event is forgiven?

      Marvel could have united all Spider-Man fans around a general direction. It could have told a tale of Ock’s redemption that would satisfy everyone. Instead, it chose to stick its thumb in the eye of anyone who is deeply connected to Peter Parker. And now Dan Slott goes around taking great glee with what he’s done. He pejoratively refers to Peter Parker as “Jiminy Cricket” (which I might write on in the near future). Who does that? A man who, as Carl said in another thread, hates Peter Parker. Dan Slott might like the idea of “Spider-Man,” but deep down, for whatever reason, he hates Peter Parker.

    2. Douglas,
      I think the point of this post is far more simple and easy to understand.
      In a previous post you stated in a title “Dan Slott used anger to sell Superior Spider-Man 9, but people are really just sad — for him”
      The hypocrisy here is “Douglas Ernst is using anti-Semitism and the Holocaust to try to get traffic to his site, and people are smart enough to understand that– and think less of him.”
      You’ve taken one line out of context: “For that new society I shall live on in infamy — a mass murderer worse than Pol Pot, Hitler, and Genghis Khan combined!”
      You focused on Hitler so you could summon up the cruelty and inhumanity of the Holocaust and show pictures of actual ovens with human remains.

      That same line could have been used in a equally misleading ways to say that Slott and Marvel were trying to redeem someone with anti-Asian prejudices twice over with Genghis Khan and Pol Pot. But you went for the image that would get you the most traffic. You went with anti-Semitism and the Holocaust.

      Have you ever heard of Goodwin’s law? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law That people who are the most desperate to win an argument they know they’re losing sink to comparing what they don’t like to Nazis.
      In your attempt to get traffic for your site, you sunk to the lowest common denominator and have shown your true colors.
      I will not be visiting this site again and I would ask others to avoid it as well.

      Much like your argument where I pointed out you were wrong about Andrew Garfield’s tumblr account, I’m sure you will yet again resort to trying to justify your actions, changing the subject, and mention how you were somehow wronged by “Newsarama.” Which is odd, because I’ve never once mentioned Newsarama. But please, try whatever diversionary tactics as possible.

      And please use quotes from the Holocaust museum and more pictures of desecrated Jewish bodies in ovens, that really helps make your “point” about an out of context line from a comic book. You’re a sick person, Douglas. The sad thing is, in your mind, I’m sure you still think you’re in the right. You might be closer to Doctor Octopus than you’d like to think, and that is the greatest irony of all here.

    3. Greg,

      Dan Slott writes about a character who wants to transcend Hitler, I discuss it during my critique of said character, and I’m at fault? Classic. What makes your comments more hilarious is that I actually took the time to visit the concentration camps and the historic sites of World War II when I lived in Germany. For three years. Call me when you’ve done the same and we can compare notes.

      I have close to 700 blog posts, and perhaps 1 percent of them deal with Dan Slott. I was writing this blog long before Dan Slott decided to kill Peter Parker. The traffic I get from guys like you pales in comparison to what I’ve received writing on military matters and fallen heroes. REAL heroes. So please, forgive me if I laugh.

      I don’t need attention. I wrote this blog when five people a day came here, and I’ve written posts that have brought in 5,000 or more. Your insults do not phase me.

      Now either swallow your pride and reply, or stew in silence with the fact that you melodramatically said you wouldn’t return, but did so anyway.

    4. In your attempt to get traffic for your site, you sunk to the lowest common denominator and have shown your true colors.

      I love that. Though I totally disagree with Greg’s premise, it is somehow a “crime” to attempt to get traffic to a site? Yet, when a man-child like Slott “sinks to the lowest common denominator” like he’s done in SSM — in an attempt to drive sales — well, this is just “good business” I guess.

    5. Zing! Great point, Hube.

      I get a kick out of Greg. First, he evokes Godwin’s law, which doesn’t apply in all cases; It’s pretty hard to talk about a character who wanted to transcend Hitler without, umm, discussing the Nazis. Regardless, I did that for a reason:

      And the only retort Dan Slott and his fans could possibly have is that Otto didn’t want to kill millions of Jews — he “merely” wanted to kill six billion people, which would just so happen to include all the Jews.

      Greg’s response? Hook. Line. Sinker.

      You’ve taken one line out of context: “For that new society I shall live on in infamy — a mass murderer worse than Pol Pot, Hitler, and Genghis Khan combined!”

      Doug, why didn’t you talk about Pol Pot? Why didn’t you talk about Genghis? I told you, Greg, and in your blind rage you did exactly what I said you would do.

      Thank you for hitting the nail on the head, Hube. And, the fact remains, if I wanted “attention” there are a million things I could do to get it. I’d title this site “Douglas Ernst Blog: Where bare-knuckled conservatism meets Glozell. I’d monetize my YouTube account and live comfortably, even if I couldn’t look myself in the mirror.

  4. what’s funny to me is this. a good portion of Slott’s defenders are the same people who were mad when Marvel wrote the 9/11 tribute that showed Dr. Doom crying over what happened. Saying he has killed more people than the events of 9/11. So the moral outrage is okay there, but what you pointed out here isn’t? the hypocrisy is astounding.

    I just hope this crap ends soon and competent people start writing again. btw I’m a liberal with morals and a sense of right and wrong.

    1. Oh, it’s definitely possible to consider yourself liberal and still believe in right and wrong. However, you will not see conservatives make the case that universal truths of right and wrong do not exist. If you find one with any academic standing or name recognition, they will be an outlier. I have met a lot of moral relativists over the years (my previous job required a good amount of travel to college campuses across the country) and they have not been conservative.

      You obviously believe in right and wrong, which is probably one of the reasons why this story line bothers you so much. 😉

    2. Great post, Doug. You perfectly encapsulate everything that is wrong with this story and its insulting premise. It’s an insult to Stan Lee, Steve Ditko and the fanbase as a whole. They used to be about entertaining people; now they’re all about pissing said fans off. Only the really hardcore, water-carrying fanboys (those who defend Slott on Twitter) will actually buy the series.

      And I gotta love how that one ignoramus thinks you’re “only trying to get web traffic.” Bloggers write because they like to write and share their thoughts with people.

    3. Thanks, Carl.

      Yes, like I said, if I merely wanted attention I’d be giving myself habenero salsa enemas on YouTube. Or, if I really wanted Dan Slott’s attention I’d drive up to New York (it’s only a few hours away), wait for him outside the Marvel offices, and then hit him in the face with a pie while dressed as Spider-Man. But alas, I’m just a law-abiding blogger who calls it like I see it: Superior Spider-Man is a disaster.

    4. Just wondered over to my local comic book shop to cancel another 2 Marvel titles. I always have a look on the shelves to see if anything catches my eye and on this occasion I wasn’t disappointed.

      My local comic shop have “bargain bags” of 4 comics for £1. In these bags were the last 5-6 issues of Amazing Spider-Man and the first 1-3 of Superior. There were some big name comics in these bags as well as a lot of independent ones. The comic that appeared most frequently in these bags were definitely Spider-Man related.

      I asked the store manager why there so many Spider-Man issues there and he said “in the last 6-7 months we have had over half of the customers who reserve Spider-Man comics cancel their reservation. unfortunately as we order so far in advance we have a surplus of stock. In fact, we are reducing our order by half.”

    1. Just saw this, Carl. Good stuff.

      Stefan Offenberg’s response to Slott’s weird Internet trolling is like a shock grenade that goes off right in Danny Boy’s face.

      “Countless negative things are said every day on the Internet about public figures. The only time they feel the need to chase them down is when they’re actually having a material effect, because it would be insane and wildly unproductive to spend your time trying to counter all of them. Are you going to claim that the despite the book being loved by the majority of readers, the words of a few posters can undermine that? That’s clearly not the situation here. Either we are representative of the audience at large, or disputing what we’re saying is a waste of time.”

      Have you ever seen Dan Slott brag about how much time he puts into the book, or how he’s up on a deadline? Maybe he puts in so much time because he’s amazingly inefficient at his job. Maybe if he didn’t spend countless hours trolling the Internet for criticism he’d have more time to spend with friends and family.

  5. From a post I just made over on the Marvel boards: “I cannot begin to express my disappointment with Dan Slott as a writer of this comic book. I have only perused issues he’s been involved in as I got out of Spider-Man after Brand New Day and J. Michael Straczynski’s (sp?) run on the book. The idea that Doctor Octopus could even come close to filling Peter Parker’s Spider booties is insulting to say the least. Peter Parker made Spider-Man not the other way around. Much like my displeasure with action movies such as Die Hard where John McClane stops being a regular guy/cop and becomes some invincible action hero, I don’t enjoy the idea of a sanctimonious blowhard (Ock, not Slott), taking over the character of my favorite character who strives to be the best possible human (not just hero) that he can be. Rather than succeeding, Peter is filled with doubt and ALWAYS holds on to his failures. This is what makes the character so utterly human and relatable to us ordinary people. No one is perfect and Peter exemplifies that notion by internalizing his issues like many of us o.He is just someone trying to do the best they can, and that is why root so hard for him, win or lose, because he does his best to do what’s right in spite of his previous failures. My Spider-Man would never take a life on purpose. For now, do not make mine Marvel.”

    I know I’m late to the game but thank you for addressing the dreck that is the current Spider-Man title and the writer behind it. This is by far the biggest back stabbing I have ever experienced regarding a character that I have admired and strived to be like. I shudder to think what happens if Peter does return but Ock’s actions remain as part of the legacy of the character, I doubt any of the characters in the Marvel Universe could ever completely trust Peter again.

    1. BringBackPeterParker,

      Thanks for taking the time to read my post and comment. I really do appreciate it. The more people who can articulate what you just said online, the better.

      The sad thing is, the points you’ve just so nicely spelled out will get you mocked by Dan Slott and Steve Wacker. They are so invested in this travesty that they would rather make fun of people with incredibly valid concerns (e.g., “Peter Parker made Spider-Man not the other way around”) than to own up to their mistakes.

      Keep hammering this home, BringBackPeterParker. Take the high ground with Dan Slott when he goes low and what you say will resonate even more with those on the fence.

    2. What a joke this company has become. That was literally my first post and apparently will be my last. I tried to log in today in order to respond to post where Dan Slott replied to me only to find it looks my profile is there, but I am unable to take any action. Way to relate to the fans Marvel. You are completely right about him only coming back with personal attacks and quoting numbers after glancing through that thread. If I behaved like that at my job (with a my way or the highway kind of attitude) I would be let go. As a company, it’s in your best interest to listen to your customers, not just yank their chains and laugh about there being no other game in town.

      It reminds me of a battle I’m currently embroiled with Comcast in regards to internet service. I recently bought a condo and wanted to have internet but my dealings with Comcast have enlightened me as to why they are consistently ranked last or close to it in customer service. The utility room has 48 cable connections, teo for each unit, and is currently wired for DirecTV. Unfortunately, none of them were labeled except for a sparse few that Comcast was currently servicing. Rather than getting a helpful tech either of the times I called, I was first treated to a tech that didn’t think I could have internet without also bundling TV, which would be stupid as DirecTV is covered by the condo fee and it would be stupid to pay the same thing twice. The next tech had the politeness to call me, while running late, and then tell me he didn’t think he could set me up as none of the wires in the basement were labeled.

      Finally, after being completely fed up, I set my alarm for two am the last two nights and went down to the utility room in order to disconnect each cable one by one until I found the ones leading to my unit so I could label them. I’d like to think that’s what Peter Parker would have done, not just sit there and take it but find a solution to the problem in his own way.

      Sorry to get off on a tangent, but thanks for taking the time to address this Spider-Man issue as well as responding to me (without blocking me after one comment, I may add). I have verymuch enjoyed reading your criticism in regards to this. Keep up the good fight and the good work!

    3. Yikes. They pulled the plug on you after a single post? It wouldn’t surprise me. The moderator there once banned me for months. When other people asked why he said I was using foul language and brought up some topic he warned people not to talk about. The odd thing was … I was at work all day and didn’t log in. He completely fabricated the story, but because I was banned I didn’t really have any recourse. I sent a private message to another moderator and he said he empathized with me but couldn’t really do anything.

      In terms of your Comcast situation it sounds like you’re dealing with it in a way that would make Peter proud! Too bad kids reading Spider-Man today will only get Otto as a, umm, “role model.”

      Anyway, feel free to vent here any time. Unlike the Marvel boards, I’m always up for a good debate.

  6. @Bringbackpeterparker:
    I supported you…Slott attacked me, I defended my posts and I was also banned.
    Welcome to the club. You did not break any rules. You can see why others find the marvel forum a joke now. My friend Fuzzball even wrote an article about this.
    They will do anything on that site to hide the truth. To be fair how many books do you have to look through to know if you want to get it. You do not have to read a book from cover to cover to know that you will not like it.

    Slott hated me from the start when I supported my friend and co-worker known as Fuzzball online, which was also banned for making Slott look bad.
    Since then Slott has went at me in other forums spreading lies in order to try to make himself look good.

  7. Keep Up the good work here Douglas. Kind of came late to the game as I haven’t read Marvel in awhile, due to their mostly crappy writing. I’ve been reading DC and others mostly. But I was a huge Spider Man fan as a kid. I shudder to think how it would have traumatized me reading 700 when I was younger. And I read the first few “Superior” SM and was pretty much annoyed and disgusted. I think its an interesting commentary on our times when archetypal heroes such as Spider Man become twisted by what sounds like an utterly egoic control freak (referring to Slott, not Ock). His death was far from what it should have been, and not at all a fitting tribute to the man that Peter was and everything that he stood for. Marvel Comics have really gone into the toilet… Its too bad really. Back to the independents and the DC. Even if they resurrect Spider-Man as Peter, the long time fans will have this utter trash sitting and festering in their guts like foul bile and will never look at the character the same again…. Realistically (comic-wise), how could someone come back from such an event? Doctor Strange saves him or something? But the lingering stink of the story remains… Bad stuff…

    1. [Peter Parker’s] death was far from what it should have been, and not at all a fitting tribute to the man that Peter was and everything that he stood for.

      That’s the thing…and for all intents and purposes Dan Slott killed Peter in such a despicable manner twice. How anyone can believe him when he says he loves the character is beyond me.

    2. It all would have made a great “What If”… But a mainline story like that. I would have been horrified to have my kid read it… Comics were way better in the 70s.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s