Debate!
Um, don't know if anyone will care, but it IS relevant to our interests.
I have a debate going on here in my LJ about which version of Gabriel's history is better: a) he IS Loki and the god known by that name (and all subsequent mythology attached to him) never existed except as a complete fabrication of Gabriel himself or b) he stole (or was willingly given) the original Loki's identity and has been posing as him this whole time.
Version a) is totally winning (because it's potentially the most canonical, no doubt), but since I am a dumbass and only recently twigged that a) was an option, I was wondering if there are people out there like me who are really quite attached to interpretation b)? Or if anyone has anything else from their own personal canon to flesh out Gabriel's story even more?
I have a debate going on here in my LJ about which version of Gabriel's history is better: a) he IS Loki and the god known by that name (and all subsequent mythology attached to him) never existed except as a complete fabrication of Gabriel himself or b) he stole (or was willingly given) the original Loki's identity and has been posing as him this whole time.
Version a) is totally winning (because it's potentially the most canonical, no doubt), but since I am a dumbass and only recently twigged that a) was an option, I was wondering if there are people out there like me who are really quite attached to interpretation b)? Or if anyone has anything else from their own personal canon to flesh out Gabriel's story even more?