|
Post by jensaltmann on Jan 18, 2010 0:38:47 GMT -8
Indeed, given how much bad karma Norman has racked up, it's arguable that what he WANTS (a younger version of himself - an amoral business tycoon who's smart enough to succeed, but not so smart that he outshines Norman) is not what he DESERVES, so Mephisto would give him a "worthy" son in terms of what Norman DESERVES - a guy who's disinterested in business but is also morally superior to Norman in every way, to the point that he'll eventually outshine Norman. All things considered, especially how bad a father Norman was even before he became GG, if Mephisto were to give Norman the son he deserves, then he'd reset Harry to the depressive junkie he was ca. Spider-Man 100. Not someone who can outshine Norman, but someone who reminds him that whatever he does, he's a major failure at raising a halfway decent child.
|
|
|
Post by K-Box on Jan 18, 2010 7:01:27 GMT -8
All things considered, especially how bad a father Norman was even before he became GG, if Mephisto were to give Norman the son he deserves, then he'd reset Harry to the depressive junkie he was ca. Spider-Man 100. Not someone who can outshine Norman, but someone who reminds him that whatever he does, he's a major failure at raising a halfway decent child. You raise a fair point, except that Norman already went through his phase of acknowledging Harry's failures from that era, and Norman basically found a way to rationalize his belief that it was all Harry's fault for being too weak to be worthy of the Osborn name (hence, why Osborn started grooming Peter as a potential heir during that time). It would be far more painful for Norman, I think, to realize that his son was finally succeeding because he was no longer anything like his father, because there's no way that Norman could shrug it off by saying, "Oh, he's just too weak to carry the Osborn name," because if Harry succeeds by defying everything that Norman stands for, then it basically leaves Norman with no other alternative but to admit that the only thing that was ever wrong with Harry was the fact that Norman himself was his father. At which point, Norman would be forced to kill Harry, because his only other alternative would be to commit suicide.
|
|
|
Post by jessebaker on Jan 18, 2010 12:09:26 GMT -8
You know, this conversation DOES make me realize the problems with the whole "Norman is an abusive father" retcon, now that both Norman and Harry are alive. And it makes me wonder why Quesada didn't make retconning it out of canon one of his major priorities, especially in light of the ultimate excuse they gave for HOW Harry is still alive (Norman faked Harry's death and put him in an insane assylum to cure him of his madness).
"Norman as an abusive father" only works if ONE of the two are dead. Norman being dead, it let them make him even EVILER than he was beforehand (as if murdering Gwen Stacy wasn't enough to make him King Satan) PLUS lets them make Harry being Green Goblin make sense in the sense that Norman fucked up his son so badly that he ended up taking on his father's alter ego in an insane bid to gain his dead dad's love.
Alternatively, with Harry dead, it makes Norman even more crazier given the notion that Harry was his morality chain and the only thing keeping him from doing shit like killing Gwen Stacy on a regular basis. Also, it creates the unconscious notion of Norman KNOWING he fucked up with his son, which is why he focused so much energy on trying to "convert" Spidey to become his replacement son, since part of his appeal towards Peter was that Peter DID have the courage to stand-up to Norman.
But like I said, with Harry and Norman alive and interacting PLUS Dan Slott gutting all of Norman's post-resurrection villain motivation via the ultimate answer they gave for why Harry is still alive, you might as fucking use OMD to purge the entire child abuse angle from canon and go back to the Lee/Conway notion of Norman simply being an rich kid parent who was always working and who's entire basis for child-rearing/showing ANY type of emotion towards his son was to shove money into his face, let alone blaming his friends for the fact that his son would go spend said cash on drugs.
At the very least, it would explain why Norman and Harry don't interract and give us the new angle of Harry thinking that his dad being a murderous super-villain is why Norman was such an absentee father as far as trying to shield him from his dark side, as well as playing around with the notion that Harry refuses to believe the whole "Norman fucked Gwen Stacy" reveal as a way to address the whole thing as far as Harry representing the element of fandom who refuses to acknowledge "Sins Past".
|
|
|
Post by K-Box on Jan 18, 2010 19:16:51 GMT -8
... Holy shit, Jesse for the win with his read on the Norman/Harry relationship.
|
|