Talk:Venus (Marvel Comics)

Please go to

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:03, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at

As this B-Class article has yet to receive a review, it has been rated as C-Class. If you disagree and would like to request an assesment, please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject_Comics/Assessment#Requesting_an_assessment and list the article. Hiding T 14:42, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do we know for certain that the goddess' first appearance was in 2009, and that all previous appearances were of the naiad? See my rationale at the comics project talk page. BOZ (talk) 23:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For reference here is that post from comics project talk page:

For example, looking over the appearances on this page, I'd say that the naiad is Venus #1-19 and Marvel Mystery Comics #91 (from the 40s), and Avengers #283-284 & Thor Annual #8 were definitely the goddess. Marvel: The Lost Generation #5 was a followup on the 40s character, so clearly the naiad there as well. Most of the rest of that depends upon interpretation, and really requires some clarification from the writers as to which exploits belonged to which. BOZ (talk) 05:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What you say here is an easy and logical assumption to make, however there has been no confirmation of this in the comic book and therefore could be considered

WP:OR. I'd be okay with it if a concensus of the editors agree and then Vensus's fictional history can be sorted between the two characters. -TriiipleThreat (talk) 12:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I'd have no idea how to separate them without some input from the writers - which I'm hoping happens at some point in Agents of Atlas and/or The Incredible Hercules; if not there, then at least an OHOTMU type handbook. I mean, there are scenes in which Venus appears in Olympus with the other gods, and I can't see them letting a siren just hang out with them for no apparent reason, while the real Venus is who knows where. I'm uncomfortable declaring most of the rest of her appearances one way or the other. I'm sure the goddess appeared long before 2009, but I can't prove it yet. BOZ (talk) 13:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it makes sense but I hesitate to do it without an official source. -TriiipleThreat (talk) 13:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The true Goddess is the one that debuts in the 40s in the comic Venus, using her roman name. The siren is the one that debuts in Agents of Atlas. It hasn't be 100% confirmed, however there are MAJOR pointers such as the Cestus which is the biggest giveaway following the retcon. During their battle in 2011, the true Goddess Aphrodite GIVES the cestus to the siren, handing over her mantle, meaning it was in the possession of the real Goddess all this time. And in the 40s Venus can be seen with the Cestus also, throughout the publication. So it can very safely be assumed that it was in fact Aphrodite that debuted in the 40s, the real Goddess.

Another big pointer is the established powers. In the 40s Venus displays alot of powers that she actually doesnt have, however the Goddess does, such as teleporting. These are then established to help illustrate the difference between the two in 2009 when Venus is pretty much helpless against the real Goddess when she confronts her for the first time in her temple.

I know again that it isn't 100% confirmed. However those pointers, especially the fact that the cestus was always in Aphrodites possession, is pretty much a confirmed retcon that it was actually Aphrodite. The Marvel Wikia has also taken note of this and changed the histories around so that it was Aphrodite that debuted in the 40s following this revelation too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.248.81 (talk) 11:22, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is also further supported by the fact that the character in the 1940s self titled issue, Venus, had a flashback to her ancient days in ancient Greece. In the flashback she cursed the ancient Greek man, Narcissus for rejecting her, turning him into a flower. Again it isn't 100% confirmed, however given the fact they did retcon Venus at all.... and the fact that the Cestus was always in Aphrodites rightful possession up until 2011... and the fact the character had a flashback in the 40s to her ancient Greek days, cursing a man... I'd say that was very firm, unquestionable evidence that the character in question was always Aphrodite, not Venus. And also, Venus cannot curse people. The list goes on. Again, the Marvel Wikia has also taken note of this and changed the pairs histories around to suit the more plausible reasoning behind this, with Aphrodite debuting in the 40s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.248.81 (talk) 11:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CONFIRMATION!!!

Aphrodite appears in Marvel: The Lost Generation #5. In the letter page in that issue John Byrne identifies her as the Greek Goddess (as the Siren character had not yet been introduced in comics until much later).

so will you now please change the history around to coincide with all other source materials.

THE OFFICIAL MARVEL WEBSITE ALSO HAS APHRODITE AS BEING THE ONE THAT DEBUTED IN 1941.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.195.240.173 (talk) 12:13, November 30, 2015

This still needs further looking into. The website states that the siren debuted in Venus #1 (1948) and that the goddess debuted in Venus #1 (1941). It should be noted that Venus #1 was in fact released in 1948, not 1941. This also doesn't address the retroactive continuity of the character.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 18:59, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The comicbook database also says Venus was retconned and replaced by Aphrodite in 2009.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:13, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The comicbook database is not an official MARVEL source of information. It is subjective to opinions.

Anyway. Solid Proof for you. In the pages of Venus series, she has a flashback to the battle of troy and cursing Narcisusses. It is stated in the retcon that Aphrodite was present during those times because that is when she stated she last felt love. There's your solid proof in the PAGES of the comics themselves. It is also confirmed in the pages of Marvel: The Lost Generation #5, in the letter page in that issue when John Byrne confirms it is infact Aphrodite. TWO confirmations in the comics themselves.

It may have very well been that before Agents of Atlas, that Venus was supposed to be the goddess because that's how she was written up until that point, displaying powers and abilities that the retcon stated only the Goddess has. (Even more confirmation from the comics)

The confusion stems from the fact that in the retcon Venus origin shows that she took up a costumed identity in the 40s, which ironically is when the Venus issue was published. But even more confirmation from the comics again, the Cestus was used in those comics, which was always in Aphrodites possession because she uses it in the retcon. And there are powers and abilities that only Aphrodite would have. The retcon also confirms the limited powers that Venus has. Which makes it impossible to have been her.

There's all the solid proof you need. Retcons are shit and they mess continuity. Scarlet Witch is a perfect example. But we need to respect that a bad writer made it happen and that's how it is. If it were going to be addressed, then it would have been by now, but it hasn't. But there ARE confirmations in the actual comics that I've just listed for you. It is our job to use our heads and there are MORE facts supporting Aphrodite than Venus.

As I pointed out above, the Marvel.com profiles (which are wikis themselves) are both contradictory and inaccurate.

WT:COMICS. I'd like to see what others think.--TriiipleThreat (talk) 19:51, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]