The merits of Jane/Loki + charts
1) Animals having fun -- a lamb dances along after a recovery and dogs enjoy a slide -- plus animals being envious and outraged.
2)
beradan linked a thought provoking article about the national differences between children's lit from England and the U.S. I am curious about more recent, post Potter, children's lit in the UK. What have been the standouts in the last decade?
3) Speaking of literature, I was amused when viewing my AO3 feeds and the fic title "Don't Cough On Me" scrolled by. This is what we've come to.
4) There's a news post at AO3 now with a look at stats and graphs for both historical growth and recent traffic. It made me think of the discussion here a few weeks back about people's comments vs kudos and, spoiler, comments are WAY up there. Which I would say provides strong evidence that when people have more time and also aren't regularly interrupted in their reading or viewing that they are more likely to leave feedback.
5) Meta Manifesto made me wonder what other frequent pairing I read that I had yet to write about. And although this is a pretty recent one, I wanted to tackle Jane Foster/Loki.
My main MCU ship had turned into Loki/Tony Stark for various reasons. But while I'm glad there is still work being produced for it, and while I'd always read various kinds of fic in it, I was feeling as if I'd pretty much seen all the story types for this pairing that I was going to.
I'd also noticed that Thor was not written about very often, especially if he wasn't paired with Loki (5,851 works on AO3). Even Brunnhilde|Valkyrie, who was set up as a new romantic possibility in Thor 3, is actually paired with him slightly less often than she is with Loki, and that's currently only 235 to 220 stories.
In the meantime, Jane Foster/Thor, the canon pairing, is still only 3,839 works after almost 10 years of the MCU, many of these appearances as a side pairing in a broader story. Yet all the works that Thor appears in currently number 56,934. The problem certainly seems to reside with Thor, who is simply not paired with anyone particularly often as opposed to appearing as a character in other people's stories.
However Jane herself appears in only 8,581 works, 364 since January 2019. It'll be interesting to see if this ticks up once the next Thor film comes out. But it is a bit mystifying. For example, her co-star Darcy appears in 16,877 works, almost double the number. Erik Selvig appears in 1,364. This is largely because Darcy is widely paired as a character and also appears as the central character in many stories. Yet why Darcy and not Jane?
Jane the scientist
There's a lot of love for Tony and Bruce being science buddies, so there ought to be a lot of interest in Jane's ferocious devotion to it, but it seems that Darcy gets way more attention in Thor fics. Secondly, Jane was the one female character (before Wasp and Captain Marvel) who came closest to being the lead in a Marvel movie. If you flip around Thor 2 you only need a bit of editing to make the movie about her rather than him. I suspect that this is a holdover from the storyline developed with Patti Jenkins, as I expect her ideas for the film centered more heavily on the female costar than other Marvel films had. The timing of it suggests none of it was actually in a script yet, but I'm thinking that it had a lot to do with Portman reprising her role.
I think it's no secret that when it comes to fanfiction, Loki is the star of the Thor films. He appears in only 49,631 works compared to Thor, but that's rather a lot for a character who has appeared so infrequently, and who is a central character in many of those works. Yet while there are a number of reasons why Jane might be paired with him (certainly more than Darcy, who never met him in canon), there are only 666 works with the two of them on AO3. So it's not just that Thor is not particularly popular but that Jane is even less so.
Given that a lot of fic prefers to go to places that canon didn't, it wouldn't be surprising to find less likely pairings happening a lot more often in fanworks. But especially in Thor 1 there is a very direct opening for the Jane/Loki pairing, unromantic as it is. It kicks off Thor and Loki's fight scene where Loki wonders what Jane did to change Thor and says that perhaps he ought to pay her a visit himself. It's an ominous statement and Thor charges him.
I never cared for the line for several reasons. The main one is that I don't agree that it was Jane that created the change in Thor, nor do I think the overall script really suggests it. I think it was Thor's realization that Mjolnir was no longer his, followed by the idea (from Loki) that his exile would be permanent. In other words, it came from his acceptance of his situation, which was a complete loss of his former privilege and position. That is a much more interesting and realistic development, especially since the "woman changes a man" trope is overdone and untrue. The man has to be willing to change and it's only then that Thor starts reconsidering his life. Jane may give him a direction, but even that is so short lived (not even a day) that it's merely a suggestion.
The second reason is that Loki's line is spoken as and responded to as if it were a sexual threat. One could easily argue that Loki didn't mean it in any sense -- he is openly trying to get Thor to fight him and he knows quite well what buttons to push. But it makes Thor seem like a jealous hothead, Loki a rapist, and Jane a pawn.
But there have been stories that followed through on Loki's line, where he does visit Jane and goes through a similar conversion as his brother. And depending on whether or not you believe opposites should attract or birds of a feather make more sense, their pairing holds a lot of promise. You would think that these two had more in common, just as she does with Tony or Bruce, rather than Thor. One thing hampering all of that is that Jane clearly has a type. But when it comes right down to it, her work is her first love.
I say this because I definitely believe that at least half of Jane's interest in Thor is her curiosity about where he comes from and what he can tell her about the universe. Notice that at first Jane waves off Thor's injuries with "he's fine!" when she wants to pursue data about the bifrost appearance. She only goes to follow up on him when she realizes he was in the atmospheric disturbance. It is actually Darcy who first notices that he's rather hunky -- until he freaks her out.
That said, the two share an intense few days of mutual curiosity and then nothing for several years. What relationship they do have takes place in between films and with nothing more than a line or two of dialogue during Ultron. Granted, Jane and Loki spend only part of one intense day together in which they really don't get to know one another. All Jane knows is that Loki died for his brother and followed through in protecting her. Regardless of what else he did, the whole Aether incident at least gave her a pretty good idea of just what else might be out there in the universe, and Loki was not the worst person she might come across.
What's more, although Loki's MCU development has depowered him from his portrayal in the comics in a number of significant ways, it also never portrays him as an intellectual nor as intelligent as he's supposed to be. We don't know much about his interest in the cosmos as a whole. If one borrows from comics canon, or even Norse legend, Jane's interest in him as a guide to the wider universe could be quite convincing. And her fascination for learning and exploration is, to me as a longtime Loki/Tony reader, perhaps even more intriguing for Loki, since the things she wants to know about are in his wheelhouse.
Superpowered Jane
One problem though is the significant power imbalance between them. Unlike Tony Stark, who is a powerful person on many levels, and not unlike an Earth counterpart to an Asgardian royal, Jane's origins are vague and her position certainly very humble. It would be easy for Loki to be dismissive about her -- except for one rather significant development.
What interested me most in discovering Lokane stories was the role of the Aether as a strand of fanon. Leaving aside how erratic the treatment of the stones are in the MCU, she is one of several human beings who have been altered by them -- including Vision, Wanda and Pietro, and Carol Danvers. (As far as we know, there have been no lingering effects on the Guardians from handling the Power Stone). Perhaps because all we know of Jane after Thor 2 is that they broke up and that she was Snapped, there isn't as yet any kind of canon implication that Jane has been forever changed by having housed the Aether. But really, why wouldn't she be? Wanda and Pietro were merely exposed to the Mind Stone, and Carol the Tesseract. Jane actually carried the Reality Stone within her for several days.
This certainly creates new possibilities for Jane storylines post Thor 2, and makes it more likely that, like Loki, she could have the power of illusion as well as much greater strength. Just as, somehow, Bruce ends up creating a middle point between himself and the Hulk, it doesn't seem impossible that Jane could come to terms with the stone's influence and become a match for an Asgardian sorcerer. There could be a number of storylines there, where Loki could be a magical mentor, helping Jane figure out her abilities, or explaining how magic and her understanding of the universe meet. Or there could be other stories where she alone could interfere with his plans, such as while he masquerades as Odin. She might also help him achieve his plans if he lived and Thor died in Infinity War. Then there's also the new timeline verse where Loki escapes with the Tesseract and goes…where?
The other thing is that Loki is attracted to power, and a Jane who has it would be far more interesting to him than one who didn’t.
Not Always Redeemed Loki
One problem is which version of Loki that Jane ends up dealing with. While her development has been limited it's been fairly consistent. Loki, however, has been through a lot depending on what's been needed from him in each film.
As I discussed in the Loki/Tony essay linked above, there has been fanon for some time, vaguely confirmed in the last few years, that argues for Loki having been under the influence of the mind stone himself in Avengers 1. And it's certainly canon that Loki was working on Thanos' behalf and not entirely willingly. His meeting with the Hulk has thus been argued to be part of a strategy to rid himself of that connection.
There's certainly no suggestion at any later point that Loki continued to have any ties to Thanos. And while Thor 2 ends with Loki on the throne and Odin inexplicably replaced, there's no reason to think that Loki wasn't, in fact, near death on Svartleheim when Thor left him, merely seizing the opportunity to return to Asgard when it appeared.
While everyone's depiction gets a hard swerve in Thor 3, Loki seems far less a villain than a vain and potentially incompetent ruler. But there's no question where he ends up -- by Thor's side and helping to rescue his people from Asgard's prophesized destruction. Where that might have headed after we don't know, but however inexplicable and useless Loki's actions against Thanos were, we know that he performed them to save Thor more than himself.
All in all, Loki's depiction is most damning in Thor 1, although it also sets up his internal conflicts and mental breakdown. As we have seen from Gamora and Nebula, for example, mass murder and assassination attempts will not necessarily keep a sibling relationship from mending. There is also the question of what it takes to make a hero in the first place. For example, a recent article suggested that our obsession with moral absolutism as defining a hero is a relatively recent development.
Stories about good guys and bad guys that are implicitly moral - in the sense that they invest an individual’s entire social identity in him not changing his mind about a moral issue - perversely end up discouraging any moral deliberation. Instead of anguishing over multidimensional characters in conflict - as we find in The Iliad, or the Mahabharata or Hamlet - such stories rigidly categorise people according to the values they symbolise, flattening all the deliberation and imagination of ethical action into a single thumbs up or thumbs down. Either a person is acceptable for Team Good, or he belongs to Team Evil.
Loki has defied simple categorization, which is likely why he is either a favorite villain or simply a favorite character for many a fan. (Not to mention that, if Thor 3 gave us anything, it was the clear message that Loki was hardly the worst of Odin's kids). As a result it is possible to portray him in fanworks along a sliding scale of morality, where depending on mitigating factors he could have been a young embattled ruler left on his own to make terrible decisions. Or it could be that the brief time in power revealed his true colors as a genocidal murderer. (That this was motivated by self-hatred, however, seems difficult to refute).
What is harder to square is that Jane would find herself drawn to someone that unbalanced on the decency scale. So while there are certainly dark fics out there where Jane isn't exactly on board with Loki's obsession with her, for the most part she's dealing with someone difficult and emotionally cruel rather than a torturer.
In some ways though, Loki's failings are Jane's strengths. As Thor and Loki once told one another, surrender was not in Thor's nature and satisfaction was not in Loki's. Indeed, whether it's for adulation, love, power, or control, it's not difficult to believe that Loki has a gaping hole in him that's hard to fill. And rather like Thor, giving up is not in Jane's nature either. Whether or not one agrees with Phil Coulson that Loki lacks conviction (something many have ascribed to the fact that Loki was throwing the match against the Avengers), he certainly lacks Thor's bullheaded approach to problems. Jane, however, has both Thor's stubbornness but a mental approach to things that is much more in keeping with Loki's own habits. So she may serve to complement him in ways that Thor does not, while still keeping the "opposites attract" component that Loki is accustomed to.
It is not difficult to imagine that Jane would break as many rules as Tony Stark were she simply in a position to do so. But she would undoubtedly have harder limits on this than Loki. Thus while a heroic Loki is unnecessary for a likely pairing, she would also have to be able to believe that his worst days were behind him.
Human AU Jane and Loki
To some degree an all-human Jane and Loki would not be unlike Pepper and Tony. These two could definitely be The Bickersons. However, there are also some significant differences. Both of these people are obsessive but in different ways. Jane is typically obsessed with her projects and responsibilities, someone generally uninterested with the opinions of others or being a girly girl, and often distracted and socially isolated. Although Darcy is generally around as the buddy who is concerned with all the things Jane isn't, her role is usually as poorly developed as the sidekicks in most romance stories are. She is there largely to push Jane into a relationship and to serve as a sounding board for her reluctance and complaints.
I haven't run into any AUs yet where Jane was not a scientist, whether she was a teacher, a student, or in in a lab. But her approach to her work is more important than what the work is. And in an AU setting, Loki's obsession would have to be in the same or complimentary field to hers, or potentially as someone who was seeking power and control in a way that affected Jane's work. In many cases he has been a fellow student or professor, but sometimes also a business person.
More importantly for all but the shorter works, is that Loki's dysfunctional relationship with his family is a factor in the story. This may or may not involve their appearance, but the fact that he is estranged from them is important. This factor isolates him from other people -- unlike Jane, Loki generally does not have a sounding board and we are more likely to have the story told from her POV than his. In some stories, Thor or Frigga are present and pushing him into a relationship as well.
However some stories are more of a triangle, with Jane having a relationship with Thor first before ending up with Loki. Or she may simply already know Thor and is reluctant to become involved with Loki because of what she's heard about him first, --from Thor, Sif, or the Warriors Three.
However Jane herself is also often isolated. Although in some cases Erik has become her guardian, it is rare that her parents or any family appears. This ought to be a strong connective point between her and Loki, and sometimes it does become a factor. But it is often unexplored from her end whereas Loki's troubles with relatives is a point of drama.
Because Loki's background and actions can be anything that the writer decides, it is more likely that he is someone whose behavior is misunderstood and doesn't fit in with those around him, or else he is just generally misanthropic, rather than being evil or villainous.
In regular AUs Loki is often still the God of Mischief, though his relationships in Asgard break away from the storylines in the MCU (unlike canon divergence stories). Thor may not appear in these at all, with Loki discovering Jane himself along various points in history or in current day while masquerading as human. Jane herself may not be human, and there might be more influence from comics storylines, such as where Mjolnir empowers her as Thor. However I've run into relatively few of these stories that don't somehow meet up with MCU canon in later stages.
Mesmerized Lovers
Ultimately neither Jane nor Loki are characters who are deeply interested in other people. In Jane's case this is because she is oblivious and in Loki's because he is generally contemptuous of them. Otherwise he is generally a keen observer of human nature. Also, neither of them trusts institutions and both of them have been hard done by in different ways. Although MCU Jane's background is almost non-existent, she and Loki both have legitimate abandonment issues. In her case, Jane has turned to the constancy of the stars as the center point in her life. While Loki is more of a restless opportunist, it's suggested that he craves power less than adoration.
This makes it difficult to get the two of them together since Jane is not a very reliable source of adoration and Loki would have to admire her first. But at the same time, if they have committed, it would make it difficult to break them apart. Jane is the more stubborn of the two, but Loki is mistrustful of people and relishes outsmarting them or defying their assumptions. Plus, Jane has shown herself to be devoted to one person despite great differences, long separations, and almost as much of a moon shot as her Foster Theory. Long odds are her wheelhouse. She is, at her core, a self-reliant sort. This can provide the flexibility Loki needs at the same time as his being convinced of her constancy.
What is suggested in Thor 1 is that Jane can be, if not derailed, then at least distracted by the physical component of attraction. What MCU Loki is attracted to is far more of a mystery, meaning that he could be written as aexual, heterosexual, homosexual or pansexual. It doesn't seem unlikely though, that Loki would use sexuality as a tool to advancing his interests. This could definitely lead to "hoisted with his own petard" stories involving Jane.
On the surface, although Jane is a fundamentally decent person and Loki's decency is questionable, they can look somewhat alike in terms of mowing over whoever stands in the way of what matters to them. Jane cares for Erik and learned to adapt to Darcy, just as Loki does love Frigga and Thor, and even Odin. But other people's concerns are not in the forefront of their minds. What they want is. If they can come to believe that the other person is a large part of their path to that, and they can become partners of a kind, then they might click together in a way that shuts out all others.
View poll: Kudos Footer-176
Comments at Dreamwidth
.
2)
beradan linked a thought provoking article about the national differences between children's lit from England and the U.S. I am curious about more recent, post Potter, children's lit in the UK. What have been the standouts in the last decade?
3) Speaking of literature, I was amused when viewing my AO3 feeds and the fic title "Don't Cough On Me" scrolled by. This is what we've come to.
4) There's a news post at AO3 now with a look at stats and graphs for both historical growth and recent traffic. It made me think of the discussion here a few weeks back about people's comments vs kudos and, spoiler, comments are WAY up there. Which I would say provides strong evidence that when people have more time and also aren't regularly interrupted in their reading or viewing that they are more likely to leave feedback.
5) Meta Manifesto made me wonder what other frequent pairing I read that I had yet to write about. And although this is a pretty recent one, I wanted to tackle Jane Foster/Loki.
My main MCU ship had turned into Loki/Tony Stark for various reasons. But while I'm glad there is still work being produced for it, and while I'd always read various kinds of fic in it, I was feeling as if I'd pretty much seen all the story types for this pairing that I was going to.
I'd also noticed that Thor was not written about very often, especially if he wasn't paired with Loki (5,851 works on AO3). Even Brunnhilde|Valkyrie, who was set up as a new romantic possibility in Thor 3, is actually paired with him slightly less often than she is with Loki, and that's currently only 235 to 220 stories.
In the meantime, Jane Foster/Thor, the canon pairing, is still only 3,839 works after almost 10 years of the MCU, many of these appearances as a side pairing in a broader story. Yet all the works that Thor appears in currently number 56,934. The problem certainly seems to reside with Thor, who is simply not paired with anyone particularly often as opposed to appearing as a character in other people's stories.
However Jane herself appears in only 8,581 works, 364 since January 2019. It'll be interesting to see if this ticks up once the next Thor film comes out. But it is a bit mystifying. For example, her co-star Darcy appears in 16,877 works, almost double the number. Erik Selvig appears in 1,364. This is largely because Darcy is widely paired as a character and also appears as the central character in many stories. Yet why Darcy and not Jane?
Jane the scientist
There's a lot of love for Tony and Bruce being science buddies, so there ought to be a lot of interest in Jane's ferocious devotion to it, but it seems that Darcy gets way more attention in Thor fics. Secondly, Jane was the one female character (before Wasp and Captain Marvel) who came closest to being the lead in a Marvel movie. If you flip around Thor 2 you only need a bit of editing to make the movie about her rather than him. I suspect that this is a holdover from the storyline developed with Patti Jenkins, as I expect her ideas for the film centered more heavily on the female costar than other Marvel films had. The timing of it suggests none of it was actually in a script yet, but I'm thinking that it had a lot to do with Portman reprising her role.
I think it's no secret that when it comes to fanfiction, Loki is the star of the Thor films. He appears in only 49,631 works compared to Thor, but that's rather a lot for a character who has appeared so infrequently, and who is a central character in many of those works. Yet while there are a number of reasons why Jane might be paired with him (certainly more than Darcy, who never met him in canon), there are only 666 works with the two of them on AO3. So it's not just that Thor is not particularly popular but that Jane is even less so.
Given that a lot of fic prefers to go to places that canon didn't, it wouldn't be surprising to find less likely pairings happening a lot more often in fanworks. But especially in Thor 1 there is a very direct opening for the Jane/Loki pairing, unromantic as it is. It kicks off Thor and Loki's fight scene where Loki wonders what Jane did to change Thor and says that perhaps he ought to pay her a visit himself. It's an ominous statement and Thor charges him.
I never cared for the line for several reasons. The main one is that I don't agree that it was Jane that created the change in Thor, nor do I think the overall script really suggests it. I think it was Thor's realization that Mjolnir was no longer his, followed by the idea (from Loki) that his exile would be permanent. In other words, it came from his acceptance of his situation, which was a complete loss of his former privilege and position. That is a much more interesting and realistic development, especially since the "woman changes a man" trope is overdone and untrue. The man has to be willing to change and it's only then that Thor starts reconsidering his life. Jane may give him a direction, but even that is so short lived (not even a day) that it's merely a suggestion.
The second reason is that Loki's line is spoken as and responded to as if it were a sexual threat. One could easily argue that Loki didn't mean it in any sense -- he is openly trying to get Thor to fight him and he knows quite well what buttons to push. But it makes Thor seem like a jealous hothead, Loki a rapist, and Jane a pawn.
But there have been stories that followed through on Loki's line, where he does visit Jane and goes through a similar conversion as his brother. And depending on whether or not you believe opposites should attract or birds of a feather make more sense, their pairing holds a lot of promise. You would think that these two had more in common, just as she does with Tony or Bruce, rather than Thor. One thing hampering all of that is that Jane clearly has a type. But when it comes right down to it, her work is her first love.
I say this because I definitely believe that at least half of Jane's interest in Thor is her curiosity about where he comes from and what he can tell her about the universe. Notice that at first Jane waves off Thor's injuries with "he's fine!" when she wants to pursue data about the bifrost appearance. She only goes to follow up on him when she realizes he was in the atmospheric disturbance. It is actually Darcy who first notices that he's rather hunky -- until he freaks her out.
That said, the two share an intense few days of mutual curiosity and then nothing for several years. What relationship they do have takes place in between films and with nothing more than a line or two of dialogue during Ultron. Granted, Jane and Loki spend only part of one intense day together in which they really don't get to know one another. All Jane knows is that Loki died for his brother and followed through in protecting her. Regardless of what else he did, the whole Aether incident at least gave her a pretty good idea of just what else might be out there in the universe, and Loki was not the worst person she might come across.
What's more, although Loki's MCU development has depowered him from his portrayal in the comics in a number of significant ways, it also never portrays him as an intellectual nor as intelligent as he's supposed to be. We don't know much about his interest in the cosmos as a whole. If one borrows from comics canon, or even Norse legend, Jane's interest in him as a guide to the wider universe could be quite convincing. And her fascination for learning and exploration is, to me as a longtime Loki/Tony reader, perhaps even more intriguing for Loki, since the things she wants to know about are in his wheelhouse.
Superpowered Jane
One problem though is the significant power imbalance between them. Unlike Tony Stark, who is a powerful person on many levels, and not unlike an Earth counterpart to an Asgardian royal, Jane's origins are vague and her position certainly very humble. It would be easy for Loki to be dismissive about her -- except for one rather significant development.
What interested me most in discovering Lokane stories was the role of the Aether as a strand of fanon. Leaving aside how erratic the treatment of the stones are in the MCU, she is one of several human beings who have been altered by them -- including Vision, Wanda and Pietro, and Carol Danvers. (As far as we know, there have been no lingering effects on the Guardians from handling the Power Stone). Perhaps because all we know of Jane after Thor 2 is that they broke up and that she was Snapped, there isn't as yet any kind of canon implication that Jane has been forever changed by having housed the Aether. But really, why wouldn't she be? Wanda and Pietro were merely exposed to the Mind Stone, and Carol the Tesseract. Jane actually carried the Reality Stone within her for several days.
This certainly creates new possibilities for Jane storylines post Thor 2, and makes it more likely that, like Loki, she could have the power of illusion as well as much greater strength. Just as, somehow, Bruce ends up creating a middle point between himself and the Hulk, it doesn't seem impossible that Jane could come to terms with the stone's influence and become a match for an Asgardian sorcerer. There could be a number of storylines there, where Loki could be a magical mentor, helping Jane figure out her abilities, or explaining how magic and her understanding of the universe meet. Or there could be other stories where she alone could interfere with his plans, such as while he masquerades as Odin. She might also help him achieve his plans if he lived and Thor died in Infinity War. Then there's also the new timeline verse where Loki escapes with the Tesseract and goes…where?
The other thing is that Loki is attracted to power, and a Jane who has it would be far more interesting to him than one who didn’t.
Not Always Redeemed Loki
One problem is which version of Loki that Jane ends up dealing with. While her development has been limited it's been fairly consistent. Loki, however, has been through a lot depending on what's been needed from him in each film.
As I discussed in the Loki/Tony essay linked above, there has been fanon for some time, vaguely confirmed in the last few years, that argues for Loki having been under the influence of the mind stone himself in Avengers 1. And it's certainly canon that Loki was working on Thanos' behalf and not entirely willingly. His meeting with the Hulk has thus been argued to be part of a strategy to rid himself of that connection.
There's certainly no suggestion at any later point that Loki continued to have any ties to Thanos. And while Thor 2 ends with Loki on the throne and Odin inexplicably replaced, there's no reason to think that Loki wasn't, in fact, near death on Svartleheim when Thor left him, merely seizing the opportunity to return to Asgard when it appeared.
While everyone's depiction gets a hard swerve in Thor 3, Loki seems far less a villain than a vain and potentially incompetent ruler. But there's no question where he ends up -- by Thor's side and helping to rescue his people from Asgard's prophesized destruction. Where that might have headed after we don't know, but however inexplicable and useless Loki's actions against Thanos were, we know that he performed them to save Thor more than himself.
All in all, Loki's depiction is most damning in Thor 1, although it also sets up his internal conflicts and mental breakdown. As we have seen from Gamora and Nebula, for example, mass murder and assassination attempts will not necessarily keep a sibling relationship from mending. There is also the question of what it takes to make a hero in the first place. For example, a recent article suggested that our obsession with moral absolutism as defining a hero is a relatively recent development.
Stories about good guys and bad guys that are implicitly moral - in the sense that they invest an individual’s entire social identity in him not changing his mind about a moral issue - perversely end up discouraging any moral deliberation. Instead of anguishing over multidimensional characters in conflict - as we find in The Iliad, or the Mahabharata or Hamlet - such stories rigidly categorise people according to the values they symbolise, flattening all the deliberation and imagination of ethical action into a single thumbs up or thumbs down. Either a person is acceptable for Team Good, or he belongs to Team Evil.
Loki has defied simple categorization, which is likely why he is either a favorite villain or simply a favorite character for many a fan. (Not to mention that, if Thor 3 gave us anything, it was the clear message that Loki was hardly the worst of Odin's kids). As a result it is possible to portray him in fanworks along a sliding scale of morality, where depending on mitigating factors he could have been a young embattled ruler left on his own to make terrible decisions. Or it could be that the brief time in power revealed his true colors as a genocidal murderer. (That this was motivated by self-hatred, however, seems difficult to refute).
What is harder to square is that Jane would find herself drawn to someone that unbalanced on the decency scale. So while there are certainly dark fics out there where Jane isn't exactly on board with Loki's obsession with her, for the most part she's dealing with someone difficult and emotionally cruel rather than a torturer.
In some ways though, Loki's failings are Jane's strengths. As Thor and Loki once told one another, surrender was not in Thor's nature and satisfaction was not in Loki's. Indeed, whether it's for adulation, love, power, or control, it's not difficult to believe that Loki has a gaping hole in him that's hard to fill. And rather like Thor, giving up is not in Jane's nature either. Whether or not one agrees with Phil Coulson that Loki lacks conviction (something many have ascribed to the fact that Loki was throwing the match against the Avengers), he certainly lacks Thor's bullheaded approach to problems. Jane, however, has both Thor's stubbornness but a mental approach to things that is much more in keeping with Loki's own habits. So she may serve to complement him in ways that Thor does not, while still keeping the "opposites attract" component that Loki is accustomed to.
It is not difficult to imagine that Jane would break as many rules as Tony Stark were she simply in a position to do so. But she would undoubtedly have harder limits on this than Loki. Thus while a heroic Loki is unnecessary for a likely pairing, she would also have to be able to believe that his worst days were behind him.
Human AU Jane and Loki
To some degree an all-human Jane and Loki would not be unlike Pepper and Tony. These two could definitely be The Bickersons. However, there are also some significant differences. Both of these people are obsessive but in different ways. Jane is typically obsessed with her projects and responsibilities, someone generally uninterested with the opinions of others or being a girly girl, and often distracted and socially isolated. Although Darcy is generally around as the buddy who is concerned with all the things Jane isn't, her role is usually as poorly developed as the sidekicks in most romance stories are. She is there largely to push Jane into a relationship and to serve as a sounding board for her reluctance and complaints.
I haven't run into any AUs yet where Jane was not a scientist, whether she was a teacher, a student, or in in a lab. But her approach to her work is more important than what the work is. And in an AU setting, Loki's obsession would have to be in the same or complimentary field to hers, or potentially as someone who was seeking power and control in a way that affected Jane's work. In many cases he has been a fellow student or professor, but sometimes also a business person.
More importantly for all but the shorter works, is that Loki's dysfunctional relationship with his family is a factor in the story. This may or may not involve their appearance, but the fact that he is estranged from them is important. This factor isolates him from other people -- unlike Jane, Loki generally does not have a sounding board and we are more likely to have the story told from her POV than his. In some stories, Thor or Frigga are present and pushing him into a relationship as well.
However some stories are more of a triangle, with Jane having a relationship with Thor first before ending up with Loki. Or she may simply already know Thor and is reluctant to become involved with Loki because of what she's heard about him first, --from Thor, Sif, or the Warriors Three.
However Jane herself is also often isolated. Although in some cases Erik has become her guardian, it is rare that her parents or any family appears. This ought to be a strong connective point between her and Loki, and sometimes it does become a factor. But it is often unexplored from her end whereas Loki's troubles with relatives is a point of drama.
Because Loki's background and actions can be anything that the writer decides, it is more likely that he is someone whose behavior is misunderstood and doesn't fit in with those around him, or else he is just generally misanthropic, rather than being evil or villainous.
In regular AUs Loki is often still the God of Mischief, though his relationships in Asgard break away from the storylines in the MCU (unlike canon divergence stories). Thor may not appear in these at all, with Loki discovering Jane himself along various points in history or in current day while masquerading as human. Jane herself may not be human, and there might be more influence from comics storylines, such as where Mjolnir empowers her as Thor. However I've run into relatively few of these stories that don't somehow meet up with MCU canon in later stages.
Mesmerized Lovers
Ultimately neither Jane nor Loki are characters who are deeply interested in other people. In Jane's case this is because she is oblivious and in Loki's because he is generally contemptuous of them. Otherwise he is generally a keen observer of human nature. Also, neither of them trusts institutions and both of them have been hard done by in different ways. Although MCU Jane's background is almost non-existent, she and Loki both have legitimate abandonment issues. In her case, Jane has turned to the constancy of the stars as the center point in her life. While Loki is more of a restless opportunist, it's suggested that he craves power less than adoration.
This makes it difficult to get the two of them together since Jane is not a very reliable source of adoration and Loki would have to admire her first. But at the same time, if they have committed, it would make it difficult to break them apart. Jane is the more stubborn of the two, but Loki is mistrustful of people and relishes outsmarting them or defying their assumptions. Plus, Jane has shown herself to be devoted to one person despite great differences, long separations, and almost as much of a moon shot as her Foster Theory. Long odds are her wheelhouse. She is, at her core, a self-reliant sort. This can provide the flexibility Loki needs at the same time as his being convinced of her constancy.
What is suggested in Thor 1 is that Jane can be, if not derailed, then at least distracted by the physical component of attraction. What MCU Loki is attracted to is far more of a mystery, meaning that he could be written as aexual, heterosexual, homosexual or pansexual. It doesn't seem unlikely though, that Loki would use sexuality as a tool to advancing his interests. This could definitely lead to "hoisted with his own petard" stories involving Jane.
On the surface, although Jane is a fundamentally decent person and Loki's decency is questionable, they can look somewhat alike in terms of mowing over whoever stands in the way of what matters to them. Jane cares for Erik and learned to adapt to Darcy, just as Loki does love Frigga and Thor, and even Odin. But other people's concerns are not in the forefront of their minds. What they want is. If they can come to believe that the other person is a large part of their path to that, and they can become partners of a kind, then they might click together in a way that shuts out all others.
View poll: Kudos Footer-176
Comments at Dreamwidth
.