Comic Book Questions & Discussion

Originally posted by Smurph
I just read the stuff Phil posted, not the rest of the comic yet, but my takeaway was that GEB is all the badness. It spoke in the first person whether as Upside Down Man or Trigon or Lucifer and notably, as Trigon, seemed to reference Raven in the father/daughter sense.

So my read wasn't that GEB = Lucifer per se but that Lucifer is ultimately one form (maybe the greatest/purest) of GEB.

Also the scene reads like a clear homage to that s7 scene in Buffy where the First Evil takes the form of all the Big Bads as it monologues...

Originally posted by Galan007
So yeah, GEB was obviously meant to be Lucifer, even if it wasn't directly stated. His reference to Bowie at the end was a dead giveaway.

And like qwerty mentioned: Watters(the guy who went out of his way to portray Lucifer and GEB as the same entity in his series) was one of the writers here... So his thoughts on the matter clearly stuck.

I'm happily surprised by the "reveal", though -- I figured DC would do something a LOT more idiotic with GEB, tbh.

Originally posted by Galan007
Well if we go by Watters' series, then there are several different "avatars" of Lucifer that all seem to coexist simultaneously, depending on the 'need' of the story or whathaveyou: one is the ruler of Hell, one is the owner of a bar in LA, one is the Angel Samael, one is a crazed/bearded strandcast who is stuck in Hell, one is a demonoid goat-thing, one is GEB... and so on.

Does it jive with Carey's or Gaiman's original interpretation of the character? Not really. Although per Watters-canon, their stories could have just revolved around one specific avatar of Lucifer. Watters himself, however, made Lucifer much more of an all-encompassing entity: quite literally the equal/opposite/antithesis of the Presence... And it seems like DC-proper has stuck with that concept(for better or worse.)

Originally posted by Smurph
imo, Lucy and GEB are two circles in a Venn diagram with significant overlap. The circles are different sizes but that's a separate debate.

I think Lucifer is GEB in the sense that GEB is all the darkness in DC and Lucifer is (now) the archetypal face of that concept.

I think Lucifer is not GEB insofar as GEB is also Trigon. And Upside Down Man. And... does GEB turn into Empty Hand after Trigon and before Lucy?

Similarly and conversely, as Galan/Qwerty pointed out there are aspects of Lucifer that may not 'overlap' with GEB.

Just seems like the great darkness is a concept that runs through all the badness in DC.

In essence -- 'God' contains both Yahweh and Lucifer, the light and the dark, and only when this plays out inside the story, which is made of conflict/dualities, does it take forms of various beings. These different parts, the "Good"[Light]/"Bad"[Dark], are shown off as existential enemies, both on the macro [GEB -- the Lucifer side of God] and on the micro [Deathstroke and the villains], but in essence they're all part of the same big all encompassing concept. In that way, the idea of Lucifer manifests at different level [Fallen Angel, GEB, random helllord etc.]. Make no mistake -- the current writers of "I'm left handed and thus you, Darkseid, are my jerk off king" don't think of it like this, but I find it a simpler overall explanation that bypasses contradictions.

That doesn't really work, because Morrison talks about the Overvoid subsuming light and dark. But as of Justice League Incarnate the Overvoid is the Ultimate Light and it's fighting the Great Darkness.

To be fair the unity/non-duality idea was thrown in the lead up to Death Metal when we learned that there were beings living in the Overvoid, not to mention Mandrakk's return.

why are white women so much hotter than black and asian

Originally posted by MrMind
why are white women so much hotter than black and asian

Is there any reason I shouldn't just ban you for that bullshit?

sorry

Originally posted by Philosophía
Even though the two of you are on different ends of the discussion, I actually agree with both, in as far as my interpretation of the concepts. I see Light/Dark [i.e. GEB and the Light, Lucifer/God] as the same being once you zoom out of the story itself, similar to how Morrison sees it:

In essence -- 'God' contains both Yahweh and Lucifer, the light and the dark, and only when this plays out inside the story, which is made of conflict/dualities, does it take forms of various beings. These different parts, the "Good"[Light]/"Bad"[Dark], are shown off as existential enemies, both on the macro [GEB -- the Lucifer side of God] and on the micro [Deathstroke and the villains], but in essence they're all part of the same big all encompassing concept. In that way, the idea of Lucifer manifests at different level [Fallen Angel, GEB, random helllord etc.]. Make no mistake -- the current writers of "I'm left handed and thus you, Darkseid, are my jerk off king" don't think of it like this, but I find it a simpler overall explanation that bypasses contradictions.

In that case, there might not need to be a need to clarify which character is an avatar of which. The 'point' of GEB is that it exists in opposition to the light, creating the same relationship of duality that Lucifer has with the Presence, that Trigon has with Raven, etc.

Originally posted by Smurph
Yeah, that's interesting to think about, and Morrison's description is certainly in line with what Constantine and GEB were saying in conversation - that the "nature" of things (eg good and evil) gets clarified at the extremes but that everything gets murky in the middle.

In that case, there might not need to be a need to clarify which character is an avatar of which. The 'point' of GEB is that it exists in opposition to the light, creating the same relationship of duality that Lucifer has with the Presence, that Trigon has with Raven, etc.

They're just branches of the 'Non-Duality' within story [which is driven by it] -- GEB/Light, Monitor/Anti-Monitor, Perpetua/Manhattan and a plethora of others -- ying/yang playing out with characters, groups of heroes/villains, energy sources etc. And the 'good' are attributed to the light, while the 'bad' are attributed to the dark. It's also a very simple explanation for why we see different origins of the DC Multiverse, with various creators -- they're all stories playing out again and again, in different variations. The current origin is that Darkness screamed causing the Multiverse to grow in the Light, the previous origin was Perpetua, the previous one then different again; there's also Lucifer/Michael and a host of others. I don't want to cram too much in this - but you'll probably get a chuckle of even the GEB having variations, such as Pralya:

Interesting here is that it's referred to as God's unconscious. [also a conscious/unconscious duality here, but I digress]

A lot of this is, of course, semi head-canon, but at this point it's the easier way to make sense of so much contradictory information.

^ I agree that zooming in on single details and snippets of on-panel banter between characters (let alone avatars of said characters) can draw us into impassable weeds of contradiction.

From a more removed perspective though... Lucifer being the Great Darkness doesn't exactly make sense with Carey's Lucifer. The Great Darkness and the Presence shook hands in the climax to American Gothic. That handshake profoundly changed the metaphysics of reality. But if Lucifer left Creation during Carey's run, that should have resulted in that handshake being undone. Yet no great metaphysical upheaval occurred.

But something of that nature did occur during Watter's run when Lucifer wrote himself out of the Book of Destiny... at least when it came to human nature. But does that shift (temporary btw) really rise to the level of the cataclysmic metaphysical upheaval one would expect of the Great Darkness and the Presence unclasping hands?

My first impression is that it does not. And Lucifer being reduced to an ambiguous cameo in a tie-in to Dark Crisis doesn't lend me any further confidence to think otherwise.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
I just read it as being personal to Constantine. Trigon and Lucifer being more specific to John than Upside down Man.

Originally posted by ODG
From a more removed perspective though... Lucifer being the Great Darkness doesn't exactly make sense with Carey's Lucifer. The Great Darkness and the Presence shook hands in the climax to American Gothic. That handshake profoundly changed the metaphysics of reality. But if Lucifer left Creation during Carey's run, that should have resulted in that handshake being undone. Yet no great metaphysical upheaval occurred.

On that note, aside from the [ambiguous] Lucifer reveal, an argument could be made that Mandrakk was actually the closest representation of GEB(in the flesh) that we've seen to date:
https://ibb.co/gMd32tV
...But that's neither here nor there.

Originally posted by ODG
^ I agree that zooming in on single details and snippets of on-panel banter between characters (let alone avatars of said characters) can draw us into impassable weeds of contradiction.

From a more removed perspective though... Lucifer being the Great Darkness doesn't exactly make sense with Carey's Lucifer. The Great Darkness and the Presence shook hands in the climax to American Gothic. That handshake profoundly changed the metaphysics of reality. But if Lucifer left Creation during Carey's run, that should have resulted in that handshake being undone. Yet no great metaphysical upheaval occurred.

But something of that nature did occur during Watter's run when Lucifer wrote himself out of the Book of Destiny... at least when it came to human nature. But does that shift (temporary btw) really rise to the level of the cataclysmic metaphysical upheaval one would expect of the Great Darkness and the Presence unclasping hands?

My first impression is that it does not. And Lucifer being reduced to an ambiguous cameo in a tie-in to Dark Crisis doesn't lend me any further confidence to think otherwise. Seemed more like a cheeky wink from the author than anything else. Constantine's direct interactions with Lucifer are few and far between, no? Lucifer isn't exactly Constantine's most personal nemesis. Lucifer shouldn't even have a claim to his soul since Lucifer relinquished control over Hell.

True, but Nergal would be too niche for most, hence the use of Lucifer.

I'm just not reading that much into it for now.

Originally posted by Galan007

On that note, aside from the [ambiguous] Lucifer reveal, an argument could be made that Mandrakk was actually the closest representation of GEB(in the flesh) that we've seen to date:
https://ibb.co/gMd32tV
...But that's neither here nor there.

i just wish they can stray away from dualism

it's such an overplayed concept

Originally posted by ODG
^ I agree that zooming in on single details and snippets of on-panel banter between characters (let alone avatars of said characters) can draw us into impassable weeds of contradiction.

From a more removed perspective though... Lucifer being the Great Darkness doesn't exactly make sense with Carey's Lucifer. The Great Darkness and the Presence shook hands in the climax to American Gothic. That handshake profoundly changed the metaphysics of reality. But if Lucifer left Creation during Carey's run, that should have resulted in that handshake being undone. Yet no great metaphysical upheaval occurred.

But something of that nature did occur during Watter's run when Lucifer wrote himself out of the Book of Destiny... at least when it came to human nature. But does that shift (temporary btw) really rise to the level of the cataclysmic metaphysical upheaval one would expect of the Great Darkness and the Presence unclasping hands?

My first impression is that it does not. And Lucifer being reduced to an ambiguous cameo in a tie-in to Dark Crisis doesn't lend me any further confidence to think otherwise. Seemed more like a cheeky wink from the author than anything else. Constantine's direct interactions with Lucifer are few and far between, no? Lucifer isn't exactly Constantine's most personal nemesis. Lucifer shouldn't even have a claim to his soul since Lucifer relinquished control over Hell.

I know nobody gives a shit what I think for unstated reasons that are only obvious to them (I say they're cliquesh ***** who only ever circle jerk each other and ostracise anyone who doesn't fit their profile), but be honest here:

You think this is all head canon. I mean, you're being diplomatic about it while I'm just pissing into the wind, but really Galan and Philo are having a head canon powwow, that adds author intent where none/little exists.

Originally posted by Galan007
Per current canon, the handshake was undone anyway -- it only represented a temporary armistice(at best) between the light and the dark. Because shortly after the events of American Gothic, the GEB continued exerting its influence through various puppets/avatars as it slumbered(such as Gog, Prime, Extant, the Anti-Life Entity, etc.) Then, when the multiverse was rebooted in the wake of IC, the truce between the light and the dark was broken all together... Which is when GEB's right hand(the extremity it used to initially broker a 'peace treaty' with the light) became The Empty Hand, and so on.

On that note, aside from the [ambiguous] Lucifer reveal, an argument could be made that Mandrakk was actually the closest representation of GEB(in the flesh) that we've seen to date:
https://ibb.co/gMd32tV
...But that's neither here nor there.

But even taking your interpretation, if the Great Darkness was an aspect of Lucifer, then Lucifer’s flight from Creation should have resulted in all of the Great Darkness’ machinations being discontinued. But clearly with these retcons, the Great Darkness’ machinations continued.

I didn’t even think about that. But that leads me more to believe that the Great Darkness is not an aspect of Lucifer but the other way around. To be frank, I’d rather Lucifer be separated completely. Lucifer was one of the Presence’s first creations. He shouldn’t be relegated to an aspect of the Great Darkness.

Originally posted by cdtm
I know nobody gives a shit what I think for unstated reasons that are only obvious to them (I say they're cliquesh ***** who only ever circle jerk each other and ostracise anyone who doesn't fit their profile), but be honest here:

You think this is all head canon. I mean, you're being diplomatic about it while I'm just pissing into the wind, but really Galan and Philo are having a head canon powwow, that adds author intent where none/little exists.

Originally posted by Philosophía
And it makes sense considering Mandrakk is the extreme edge of God's mind - total devourer/absence of story, which is where GEB resides.

Originally posted by ODG

That's not a disagreement. 🙂

I'll just take it as is and slink back off..

Originally posted by MrMind
i just wish they can stray away from dualism

it's such an overplayed concept

Originally posted by ODG
I was under the impression that the right hand of the Great Darkness was still clasped but The Empty Hand — and the rest of the Great Darkness — was scheming/manipulating.

But even taking your interpretation, if the Great Darkness was an aspect of Lucifer, then Lucifer’s flight from Creation should have resulted in all of the Great Darkness’ machinations being discontinued. But clearly with these retcons, the Great Darkness’ machinations continued.

I didn’t even think about that. But that leads me more to believe that the Great Darkness is not an aspect of Lucifer but the other way around. To be frank, I’d rather Lucifer be separated completely. Lucifer was one of the Presence’s first creations. He shouldn’t be relegated to an aspect of the Great Darkness.

👆 I don't agree with it either, it doesn't follow Gaimen's or Careys work. TGEB is completely separate as a character than Lucifer, Lucifer is a fallen angel, TGEB is the Ultimate Darkness. I hope at the end of the story, both of them are still separate, and the Darkness something you can't fully comprehend. We will see what happens.

^ Agreed. To be clear, I’m of the opinion that Lucifer has nothing to do with the Great Darkness. Or as Smurph suggested, there is a slight Venn diagram overlap.