Thoughts on the Chameleon's return

I warn random search visitors in advance: I doubt you're looking at this the way I am. Also, SPOILERS for Amazing Spider-Man 602.

As I mentioned before, this week's issue of Amazing Spider-Man features the return of the Chameleon, who in the course of the issue manages to kidnap and impersonate Peter Parker as a ploy to get inside the high security of City Hall, wherein J Jonah Jameson is now serving as Mayor. At least, that's what we assume he's going to do, he hasn't done it yet.

The issue's writer, Fred van Lente, has done a really good job updating the character for the modern world. He's written in a creepy, quite chilling way; ruthless in what he does, clinical, professional... and to me, not entirely convincing.

One fairly major issue I have is this: I've never seen the Chameleon as a serial killer. In this issue he kills one bystander so he can take over their life, and then 'kills' (because, you know, I highly doubt Spider-Man himself is about to die off-panel) Peter Parker too. Without much concern for either death.

Now sure, we could argue that many people in this world wouldn't be missed, especially if after the Chameleon impersonates them, he makes arrangements for them to 'leave town'. And yes, I know it makes the character more threatening if he's willing to kill, and I also know it's just a story and no-one thinks these things through. I'm only giving it thought because frankly I've spent way too much time thinking about this character, as I'm sure you realise.

My take was always that if the Chameleon had to impersonate someone specific, he'd get them out of the way if needed, but only temporarily. He'd also quite often just go ahead and do it, and leave others to figure out why there were two people who looked exactly the same wandering around. This has been seen in previous comic appearances, too.

My other thought was that often, when the Chameleon chose a disguise, it'd be one that wasn't even based on a specific person; it was instead just a generic disguise, non-specific, but convincing. If after all you just need to blend into the crowd, how hard can that be?

Of course for us, as particular consumers of a particular fetish, it's the specific impersonation we crave. That's always more fun to read about. Which is why I found it quite thrilling to see the Chameleon impersonate Peter Parker - even though he's done this before (briefly). As you can see in this preview for next week's issue, he certainly gets away with it, to the extent that he actually manages to seduce Peter's roommate, Michelle - who in fact Peter's already slept with.

Which brings up an interesting point; some commenters on that preview have said that this is rape, because Michelle, while she consents to sex, isn't consenting to sex with Peter. Interesting argument, and I wonder how it'd hold up in the courts. If you think for all intents and purposes that the person you're sleeping with is who they say they are, is it rape? I expect the argument would hinge on consent regardless of who it is.

It is of course a downright sleazy and villainous thing to do - to take advantage like he certainly does - but hey, the Chameleon is a villain. And one thing this storyline seems to be doing is re-affirming his place as a Grade-A one, at that.

If that leads to more storylines, great. I've got to say, it's gotten me thinking about the Chameleon again as a character. How fickle am I, eh?