Amazing Spider-Man #45

[cyberghostface]

 

Comments

[alan2099]

Are they finally going to address how Sandman used to be a good guy?

[starwolf_oakley]

The Wizard used his Id machine on the Sandman. It was used as an explanation for Sandman being bad again when John Byrne took over AMAZING. IIRC, Byrne said he thought Sandman had to be bad if he was on the FBI’s Most Wanted list in his first Lee/Ditko story.

https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Wizard%27s_ID_Machine

[cyberghostface]

Yeah this is what Byrne said:

“I might mention that one of the things I really dislike about the Sandman is the way he was turned into a big goof by later writers -- evidently those who forgot he was once on the FBI's Most Wanted list. When I was working on CHAPTER ONE, I called the FBI and, after identifying myself, asked what it took to get on that list. Mass murder and child killing, for a start.

Not the kind of guy you want chumming around with Spider-Man in a Xmas issue!!!”

So I did my own research. Stan Lee wrote that issue in 1963. During that decade this guy was also on the FBI's Most Wanted list:

https://www.historicalcrimedetective.com/msm-kenneth-eugene-cindle/

Why was he on the list? Did he kill a bunch of kids? Blow up a building? No, he held up a restaurant and stole $236. He had been in prison before for various other robberies and assaults as well. Not a nice guy, but not Ted Bundy either. Why is it so hard to believe that Sandman being a bank robber wasn't enough to be on the list?

[zylly]

I hate that so much. Byrne erased an amazing reformation and redemption story because he failed to understand standards had changed since the 60’s.

[zylly]

Also, Jesus, the you can practically hear the arrogance in “ evidently those who forgot he was once on the FBI's Most Wanted list”.

[shakalooloo]

Yes, but with the rolling Marvel timeline, what once took place in the sixties no longer did. It was always just 'ten years ago', so I can understand why Byrne would not want to keep things in line with decades-old setting information.

On the other hand, he could have just ignored that one line in light of all the stuff since then that shows that, I don't know, maybe Sandman was innocent of whatever crime got him on that list!

In any case where a character has had development, I think it's almost always better to stick with that rather than trying to ensure they remain true to their first appearance forever.

[zylly]

It would have been significantly easier to ignore that one line than go against the grain of what had been over a decade of stories by that point. But Byrne in general seems particularly disdainful of characters who've grown or drifted too far from their original selves.

And I'm not saying Sandman was a saint. His membership in the Frightful Four, the times he fought the Hulk, the guy was definitely a villain. But he'd had a loooong history of being "not that bad."

[mazway_75]

They had tried to spin it that Sandman was faking his reforming to get a pardon, which was out of character as never a guy known for his brains or patience.