Recent stories centered around Gwen Stacy and Mary Jane Watson, and nemesis Flash Thompson stepped aside for nemesis Harry Osborn... It was evolution, but 360 degrees' worth. Same old Spider-Man, same old Peter Parker, same old problems at the core."
Every now and again, though, a writer goes beyond a surface-level change to do something that fundamentally alters a character's core - and it's something designed to last. Superman and Spider-Man are prime examples because in the 1980s and 1990s both Marvel and DC allowed two of their biggest heroes to marry. Ironically, neither publisher handled it too well in the medium term; both implemented reboots that erased the marriages. Spider-Man's was particularly controversial, with the "One More Day" arc seeing the wall-crawler strike a literal deal with the Devil that rewrote his personal continuity. Superman's was part of a broader reset, one of DC's frequent "Crises." In the longer term, though, DC actually backed out of their retcon, and Superman is once again a family man. A recent run of Amazing Spider-Man, by Nick Spencer, appeared to be setting up a similar arc - but backed out of it in the end.
In a recent interview with AiPT, Marvel editor Jordan D. White expressed his views on this. Although he mostly works on the X-Men line, not Spider-Man's, he was undoubtedly expressing the company position when he explained he thought the changes to Superman's status quo were a mistake. "When you look at a single character like Superman," he observed, "I think it’s kind of a bummer that Superman has aged so much that he’s now a married guy with a son. And I know that some people want Spider-Man to be that and I’m glad he’s not because it changes the character from being someone you can relate to into someone who is like your dad."
It's an interesting argument, but it is fundamentally flawed in that White fails to realize people can have different relationships with characters - and that those changed relationships are not necessarily lesser. It is entirely possible for one generation of readers to relate to Superman or Spider-Man as singles trying to navigate their tortuous love lives, and for another generation of readers to relate to these two characters as married men and father figures. Character growth does not need to be the enemy of serialized storytelling; it can be its friend and ally instead.
In reality, Superman serves as a perfect illustration of what can be gained by embracing real change. There are now essentially two Superman, not one. There is the original, who can be related to as a seasoned hero and a father who loves his son and struggles to balance duty with the need for relationships; and there is his son, Jonathan Kent, who has now stepped into his father's shoes as Superman and whose existence allows readers to enter into a whole new reading relationship with Superman. The sheer potential of this is perfectly demonstrated by the media reaction when Jonathan Kent was revealed to be bisexual; suddenly a whole new group of people could relate more directly than ever before to the Superman mythos, one of the greatest and most enduring in comics.
There's a striking contrast with Marvel Comics, especially when it comes to Spider-Man. The reality is that Marvel already has two Spider-Men - Peter Parker and Miles Morales (plus Ben Reilly at the moment, but nobody's really expecting that to last... because "illusion of change"). Miles was originally introduced as part of Marvel's Ultimate universe, in a timeline where Peter Parker was killed, allowing Miles to become the new Spider-Man. He was transported into the mainstream universe in the aftermath of 2015's Secret Wars, but the problem is that he now occupies a space that - because of the illusion of change - the still-living Peter Parker has not fully vacated. Miles is still treated as the "other" Spider-Man, the second-stringer. Miles Morales deserves better, but he won't get it until Marvel actually allows Peter Parker to change.
To be fair to Marvel, the publisher does keep trying to offer something to readers who want Peter Parker to grow up and have a family. But these are typically alternate timelines, as seen in Spider-Man: Renew Your Vows, or future realities that may never come to . They're enough to whet readers' appetites, but they don't feel as though they're especially important, simply because they're completely divorced from the main continuity. Marvel's commitment to the illusion of change essentially means the characters are stuck, endlessly going through the same cycle... at least until the day a generation of writers and editors take over who grew up reading the comics of the '90s and seek to restore the status quo they connected with Spider-Man through.
There are surprising parallels between Superman and Spider-Man. In both cases, the publishers allowed them to grow up and get married; in both cases, they panicked and backed out. But now, in creative , the Superman franchise can go places it could never go before, while the Spider-Man is locked in an eternal status quo that divests stories of impact and meaning. Ironically, J.D. White's comparison between Spider-Man and Superman doesn't make the point he believes it does; rather, it indicates the limits of Marvel Comics, imposed because of their fear of real change over change that is simply illusory.
