cosmic armour superman vs white phoenix of the crown /jean grey

Are you seriously going to ignore all the implications? It's a pretty obvious metaphor.

Morrison's monitors are a race of beings that exist beyond the DC Universe in the 4th (our 3rd) dimension. They monitor the DC universe making sure it goes the way they want and are vampiric sucking the universe dry. Sounds similar to the editors sucking it dry of money yes? I've also seen some fans say the monitors were authors or even continuity focused fans but editors make a lot more sense.

Seriously, Superman Beyond and Final Crisis are both pieces of metafiction. It's made clear that Superman is living in a story, we also have the bleed, Superman reaching out to the reader, 4th dimension, limbo, and I'm sure many other meta concepts I can't recall right now.

Metaphor or not, comic characters are comic characters. None of them are "beyond the writers" none of them can "consider the writer's world insignificant".

They're characters for Pete's sake made by people for Pete's sake. I can go ahead and claim that my character can kick my butt in real life, put it on panel, have it published, then distributed and then claim that since my character can kick my butt on panel, he can literally destroy my 10 year old nephew in real life. But once a 10 year old picks up the comic and tears it up, I'd still be pretty much wrong...

You could, of course, say the same thing about TOAA.

Anyway yes, we could rip up the comic but even then Superman's story will continue. And that's what Morrison is ultimately saying in the comic. That story is bigger than anyone of us.

BTW, when Morrison does reference the reader it is as a being beyond Superman's comprehension.

Originally posted by ares834
You could, of course, say the same thing about TOAA.

Anyway yes, we could rip up the comic but even then Superman's story will continue. And that's what Morrison is ultimately saying in the comic. That story is bigger than anyone of us.

BTW, when Morrison does reference the reader it is as a being beyond Superman's comprehension.

Never claimed the TOAA was anything but.

Yes, the "stories will continue", that's what fictional things do when they are imagined/remembered by their creators/readers. But to say that they can affect/dwarf/go beyond anything in the real world is silly and shouldn't be used as a platform for argumentation.

"Referencing the reader" metaphorically is still that, a metaphor.

Fair enough.

But lets set this straight, I'm not literately arguing that Superman can beat up real world people. However, yes, Morrison is saying that Superman's story is "bigger" than things in the real world. It's a concept that he often uses.

And when he references the reader, it's clearly no metaphor. In it, Superman realizes that some immense being is breathing and holding all of reality (the comic).

Its a goddamn work of fiction. Nuff said.

Originally posted by ares834
Fair enough.

But lets set this straight, I'm not literately arguing that Superman can beat up real world people. However, yes, Morrison is saying that Superman's story is "bigger" than things in the real world. It's a concept that he often uses.

And when he references the reader, it's clearly no metaphor. In it, Superman realizes that some immense being is breathing and holding all of reality (the comic).

Which it isn't, he subtly referenced it yes, and used metaphors yes but it's still a work of fiction. Also, you can't just take their metaphorical meanings and then translate them into literal "feats".

Kind of the PC Beyonder being greater than "the entire Marvel multiverse (w/c includes the TOAA) like a drop of water is to an ocean, doesn't mean that PC Beyonder is billions of times greater than the writer. We take it as it is, a story about deep abstract concepts that reference the interaction with the real world symbolically but not literally.

The reader being referenced is still a metaphor, not a very subtle metaphor. But it still is.

I have honestly no clue what you are going on about here. I'm not really talking about feats; I'm talking about Morrison showing us that the story of Superman is beyond us.

And no, the reference to the reader is not a metaphor. It's a direct reference to the reader. It's breaking through the forth wall.

yeah, it's not like the hunger was threatening the readers, or deadpool was literally threatening the writers. But let us all go crazy about how superman defeated a supposedly meta fictional being, as if that's something new.

breaking the 4th wall has already happened hundreds of times in comics.

I'm not going crazy about it. Nor am I saying it's impressive. I merely brought it up to support it being a piece of metafiction.

Originally posted by ares834
I have honestly no clue what you are going on about here. I'm not really talking about feats;

So what is the whole point of your reply to me when my point was that the whole referencing of the "real world" cannot, in fact, be used in a battleboard "feat"/"showing" to place CA Superman as somehow beyond real world people?

Originally posted by ares834
I'm talking about Morrison showing us that the story of Superman is beyond us.

IF by "beyond us" you mean that the story somehow encompasses more than the fictional universe and and uses our reality as a form of "measuring stick" to determine power levels within a fictional world as somehow beyond the real world then I disagree.

IF by "beyond us" you mean that the comic has a deeper meaning that many people won't be able to understand, then I'd say that it'll be dependent on said reader as it definitely not is beyond the author or editor (who may also read the comic).

Originally posted by ares834
And no, the reference to the reader is not a metaphor. It's a direct reference to the reader. It's breaking through the forth wall.

It was not "breaking the fourth wall", I'm assuming that this is the scan that you're talking about?:

Unless you're talking about a different page, it was never directly mentioned that the reader was present in the comic. It was indirectly alluded to, maybe. But, again, there is a huge amount of symbolism used here and that, in turn, still cannot be used as some form of implied power level vs real world people as it is still a work of fiction printed on paper.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
So what is the whole point of your reply to me when my point was that the whole referencing of the "real world" cannot, in fact, be used in a battleboard "feat"/"showing" to place CA Superman as somehow beyond real world people?

I said no such thing.

I was merely arguing that the Monitors could be on an even level as TOAA.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
IF by "beyond us" you mean that the story somehow encompasses more than the fictional universe and and uses our reality as a form of "measuring stick" to determine power levels within a fictional world as somehow beyond the real world then I disagree.

IF by "beyond us" you mean that the comic has a deeper meaning that many people won't be able to understand, then I'd say that it'll be dependent on said reader as it definitely not is beyond the author or editor (who may also read the comic).

Neither. It's the whole you can't kill an idea and the theory that symbols are more powerful than people. Stories can be bigger and, yes, more powerful than us. Not physically of course, but they can inspire us and change our beliefs. Religion, for example, is a story and look how powerful it is.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
It was not "breaking the fourth wall", I'm assuming that this is the scan that you're talking about?:

Unless you're talking about a different page, it was never directly mentioned that the reader was present in the comic. It was indirectly alluded to, maybe. But, again, there is a huge amount of symbolism used here and that, in turn, still cannot be used as some form of implied power level vs real world people as it is still a work of fiction printed on paper.

Once again you're putting words in my mouth. I never said that the reader was present in the comic, that very scan shows us we are not. I said that the comic references the reader. Which it does.

Nor was I using it to imply a power level. And yes, that is breaking the fourth wall.

Originally posted by ares834
I said no such thing.

Please reread what I said, at no time did I mention that you "said anything". I merely questioned the purpose of your reply to me.

Originally posted by ares834
Neither. It's the whole you can't kill an idea and the theory that symbols are more powerful than people. Stories can be bigger and, yes, more powerful than us. Not physically of course, but they can inspire us and change our beliefs. Religion, for example, is a story and look how powerful it is.

Which, again, is irrelevant in a battleboard as just about every piece of literature can be seen that way. So, again, I ask what's the whole point of your entire argumentation?

Originally posted by ares834
Once again you're putting words in my mouth.

Which I didn't do.

Originally posted by ares834
I never said that the reader was present in the comic, that very scan shows us we are not. I said that the comic references the reader. Which it does.

It references a being that can be construed as the reader to be more exact.

Originally posted by ares834
Nor was I using it to imply a power level. And yes, that is breaking the fourth wall.

I disagree. He "senses a presence" that could be construed as the reader but, like I said, it was never DIRECTLY mentioned. Thus, it is not clear evidence of
"breaking the fourth wall".

My point was that the monitors are, perhaps, just as powerful as TOAA as they both are representations of the "real world" in comics. That was it. I never argued against your notion that Superman can't beat up the reader or what not.

And if you don't think that that is referencing the reader, then you are being deliberately obtuse.

Originally posted by Mshinu
CA supes in a stomp
Phoenix is powerful but not at this level. White Crown Jean wankage nonwithstanding.

Going to be busy doing errands, will be back in a few hours.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Going to be busy doing errands, will be back in a few hours.

hmm not exactly sure where THAT came from...

No just grabbing stuff in costco and going for a run. Typing on an iphone while walking is annoying.

Back! Anyway:

Originally posted by ares834
My point was that the monitors are, perhaps, just as powerful as TOAA as they both are representations of the "real world" in comics. That was it.

Having a real world entity indirectly "represented" within a story via a fictional character does not translate to said fictional character being equivalent to its real world counterpart. Regardless of how similar their characteristics are.

The comic book referenced a being "who is immense and beyond understanding". Yes, that can be taken as symbolic of the reader. Yes, it can even be the author's way of trying to convince the reader that the character is trying to interact with them. But you know what? Still a work of fiction.

And Superman? Work of fiction.

The "Presence beyond understanding" he's talking about? Still a character in a work of fiction. It's a presence symbolic of the reader but it is in no way the reader himself.

If She-Hulk suddenly walks into the "real world" in a comic book where all her artists writers and editors are shown and she suddenly kicks their butt? Know those artists/writers/editors? Characters in a fictional work. They represent real world people, but they're still characters.

Once a "real world being" has been used in a comic, that being becomes part of the work of fiction and, thus, simply becomes a story character/object just like every other character/object featured in said work of fiction. Who is then bound by the rules of fiction, being that it cannot just walk out of the comic and suddenly affect the real world or, more importantly, have power over other works of fiction.

Over here, we use a combination "feats/showings/implied power" and use on panel evidence as proof to support our assertions.

The author used a lot of symbolism here, prolly after a huge dose of PCP or something. The actual "feat" is the one where Superman was touching limbo on his fingertip (at least in the scan I provided, I'm sure there are more in the comic).

Originally posted by ares834
I never argued against your notion that Superman can't beat up the reader or what not.

Good, because my I never said you did. My post below yours wasn't directly replying to you but more to the overall logic of everyone arguing the CA "real world powwa" logic.

Originally posted by ares834
And if you don't think that that is referencing the reader, then you are being deliberately obtuse.

Never said he didn't reference the reader. I was arguing about the fact that it was INDIRECTLY alluded to via symbolism but never DIRECTLY mentioned (at least in the scan I provided, if you can provide a scan that does, pls do).

Originally posted by Brooklyn
all superman's fans are crying on seeing their hero being slaughtered by phoenix. none of them had given a valid argument. but i am giving -

That stupid robot was destroyed beyond repair by the attack of 10 billion suns. Even a solar system has enough capacity of 100 billion suns it means a solar system busting level blast can destroy that robot 10 times. and phoenix is omniversal entity she will blink and robot will be obliterated.

even cosmic silversurfer can defeat that robot with ease.

http://i43.tinypic.com/2n1ciza.jpg

Now if I recall correctly, Thor either has resisted or fired an attack of this magnitude before... Thor vs Thought Robot? 😖hifty: