Marvel's Loki

 I apologize if this one’s late, or horribly done; I’m a little busy this weekend, so I don’t know that I’ll get this done on time.

My TV appears to have crapped out. That’s… disappointing.

I am re-reading Reaper Man and having quite a good time with it! I also took out Loki: Agent of Asgard from the library, which prompted this essay in my head.

On Marvel’s Loki

The mythological character Loki has fascinated me for quite a while, so naturally I find myself interested in the Marvel Comics take on him. However, in my mind I barely even classify him as an adaptation of the mythological figure; to me, there are too many differences. In order to make him an effective comic book character, Marvel’s Loki has his own look, development, and history that feels distinct from the Norse mythological character. And that’s fine! I only want to iterate that I view the two in separate categories in my head.

[I remember there being someone’s comment on Tumblr that Loki in Thor: Ragnarok is closer to his mythological personality than in Avengers, claiming that his character there is closer to the Devil than it is to Loki. I vigorously disagree–and I’m wondering where this user got that impression, given Taika Waititi has admitted that he has no interest in Norse mythology OR in the comics that movie was based off of.]

Loki in Norse mythology, for instance, is not Thor’s adopted brother, but Odin’s; they are sworn blood-brothers, which doesn’t mean they’re related as much as something similar to ‘We swear to always be bros’, which as you can guess doesn’t really work out in the end. Loki also wasn’t really known for practicing magic, as his shapeshifting was generally seen as something related to his jotunn/giant nature. He in fact mocks Odin for his use of magic in one story, as it (witchcraft) was seen as woman’s work. And Loki’s children (Fenrir, Hel, and Jormungandr) are major parts of the mythology, as is his relation to them (one text names Loki as ‘Father of Wolves’) whereas while they’re present in the comics, their role is downplayed, especially as related to Loki himself.

And yet I still find Loki a very charismatic and interesting character! As a comic book character, Loki is generally seen as Thor’s archnemesis, and yet he’s not really similar to Lex Luthor or Joker. Lex and Joker tend to be fairly static; sure, they can change, and when done by a good writer it’s a fascinating thing to see. I’m particularly fond of some of the development Luthor goes through in the New 52. But they tend to revert back to what they were, you know? Even if we tweak them slightly–focusing on Lex being more mad scientist than business man, or Joker more of an anarchist than a serial killer, they’re not prone to self-reflection or change, or even redemption in the same way. Joker or Luthor don’t really get redeemed; we don’t really see them become good people, except accidentally by pursuing their own interests in a way that benefits others. The only way to make them good guys is to actually change who they are, like in White Knight–and your mileage may vary on how effective that is.

Loki, however, CAN change. That’s part of his nature, actually. And it works because his relationship isn’t some douchebag who comes to hate the hero through some inciting incident; it’s because he’s a resentful brother. He’s family. So when stories focus on the relationship between Thor and Loki, the dynamic reflects that. One of my favorite Thor stories is Blood Brothers, in which Loki has actually won and conquered Asgard, and is deciding what to do with a captive Thor. Loki eventually decides that while he’s not going to give up his rule, he doesn’t actually want to kill Thor because he still loves his brother (and of course, from his warped point of view, he thinks Thor only opposes him because he’s been turned against Loki by his friends).

And change is kind of in Loki’s nature, isn’t it? Not just the shapeshifting thing, although that is a part of it, and is a great sort of metaphor for talking about it. But in Marvel, Norse mythology goes through cycles, and every cycle is a bit different. If Loki acts the same in every cycle, then you have a problem–you’re just telling the same story over and over again. Instead, something has to change, and Loki’s the variable that’s allowed to shift around the most. Especially as he tends to remember his past cycles, learning that they didn’t work out, and try to fix things for the better. And not just by being more effective as a villain, by sometimes not being a villain at all, but something of an anti-hero.

Which doesn’t make him always good–in fact, having Loki becoming way too nice to people is a good way to make one think he’s probably up to something. But you don’t have to make him evil all the time either. Loki can be good, or at least try to be, just in a way that subverts the usual idea of a powerful warrior hero.

Loki can be redeemed. I’m not sure the same could be said of his mythological counterpart; I’d like to think so, but the attempts I’ve seen tend to move past his murders pretty easily, which strikes me as a problem. The comics version, however, is often getting reset, and unlike a lot of characters in comics, he learns from his past. His capacity to adapt, to learn, and to change: that is what makes him interesting in a way that most comics antagonists aren’t.

—