I sympathize with your uncertainly over who the hell Don/Thor really is. I've never been able to figure it out with any degree of certainty, and current canon confuses me even more.
I suspect that when Resurrection-verse #4 comes along, we're just going to throw our hands in the air and say "screw canon" and make up our own explanation. My personal fanwank is that they're two people/personalities with one soul and one body they share between them - that when Odin exiled Thor from Valhalla, he essentially retroactively created Don to be Thor's human avatar kind of the way Dawn was created in Buffy to house the Key - so Don and Thor are kind of two aspects of the same person, or maybe like being the re-incarnation of someone and then ending up time-sharing your body with your past-life self (like Yugi & Yami Yugi in Yu-gi-oh, or Rand Al'Thor & Lews Therin in the Wheel of Time). This explains why they're sometimes one person and sometimes not, and also why they stay bound together when the other Asgardians and the mortal bodies they were inhabiting don't. And it has some nice parallels to the Bruce Banner/Hulk thing that we can capitalize on if we ever want to do a World War Hulk follow-up to Resurrection-verse. It also makes the Don/Jane Foster/Thor/Sif love quadrangle even more fun and bizarre.
ahaha, Doctor Strange. He was such an asshole
Seriously. People think Tony's a dick? Pre-car accident Strange was way, way worse. I envision him as being something like the unholy love child of House without the drug problem and Romano from ER.
Because the Avengers -- and Tony and Steve especially -- really are that important to Thor, mortal-status be damned
This. They're his family just as much as the Asgardians are. I (try to) fanwank more recent canon by positing that Thor's got pre-existing I-trusted-you-and-you-betrayed-and-cost-me-a-sibling issues that he's taking out on Tony.
having it in italics and parentheses seems to be the 'traditional' way to do it; probably because italics tends to be how writers signify a thought rather than dialogue or prose.
That's... actually a really good point, thanks *goes back and changes*
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-03-12 08:07 pm (UTC)I suspect that when Resurrection-verse #4 comes along, we're just going to throw our hands in the air and say "screw canon" and make up our own explanation. My personal fanwank is that they're two people/personalities with one soul and one body they share between them - that when Odin exiled Thor from Valhalla, he essentially retroactively created Don to be Thor's human avatar kind of the way Dawn was created in Buffy to house the Key - so Don and Thor are kind of two aspects of the same person, or maybe like being the re-incarnation of someone and then ending up time-sharing your body with your past-life self (like Yugi & Yami Yugi in Yu-gi-oh, or Rand Al'Thor & Lews Therin in the Wheel of Time). This explains why they're sometimes one person and sometimes not, and also why they stay bound together when the other Asgardians and the mortal bodies they were inhabiting don't. And it has some nice parallels to the Bruce Banner/Hulk thing that we can capitalize on if we ever want to do a World War Hulk follow-up to Resurrection-verse. It also makes the Don/Jane Foster/Thor/Sif love quadrangle even more fun and bizarre.
ahaha, Doctor Strange. He was such an asshole
Seriously. People think Tony's a dick? Pre-car accident Strange was way, way worse. I envision him as being something like the unholy love child of House without the drug problem and Romano from ER.
Because the Avengers -- and Tony and Steve especially -- really are that important to Thor, mortal-status be damned
This. They're his family just as much as the Asgardians are. I (try to) fanwank more recent canon by positing that Thor's got pre-existing I-trusted-you-and-you-betrayed-and-cost-me-a-sibling issues that he's taking out on Tony.
having it in italics and parentheses seems to be the 'traditional' way to do it; probably because italics tends to be how writers signify a thought rather than dialogue or prose.
That's... actually a really good point, thanks *goes back and changes*