Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998When Morrison writes metaphysical he means it as a concept that comes out of the page and represents more than what he portrayed. He is literally fueling his story with the greatest story of what he perceives all time. The idea of Superman is the greatest story or idea that can exist under his pen. It is the antithesis of nothingness that erodes or eats that story and destroys all future stories. This idea will eclipse and persist past everything else. It's the idea that even when everything else gets erased that Superman will exist. If comics got erased the idea is that Superman would exist. In this story Superman's story was greater than total oblivion.
This thread really is a good read. Both sides wrote well written essays and reasonable responses.
The metatextual things always made me confused tbh. Im glad there is a thread like this
As far as feats and what he did go? Not so great. That's why the metaphysical is important because it's whatever you want it to be. Morrison wrote it that way as well. He wrote it to represent heroism and stories. If you can think of the most powerful idea that exists be that hope, love, freedom or scatporn; Superman represents that in the story.
A good contrast to a typical usage in metaphysical vs actual metaphysics is also a Morrison example in Ultra Comics. That comic was metaphysical in that it was talking to the "real world" of the comic and the readers in that sense were meant to represent our world. It's typically used that there's a real world beyond comics and that's a wink and a nudge to us. What Morrison also layered on is that it was also talking to "us" - the Carver9s of his world. The comic was for DC's normal "real world" and our real world. You can see this with the whole "don't read this or..." and Ultra realizing he needs to actually manipulate the comic while being back in his world/comic panels getting erased. I think that's a good example of layering and purposes while understanding the depths that Morrison will go and his intents.
Other examples are usually comedy like Mxy, She-Hulk, Deadpool etc. Punching writers while being beholden to writers in the next book. But Morrison is entirely serious with his application so it's an integral part.
And on the note of people like Ultra Comics; because they don't have typical feats you can't exactly quantify the power. Them getting put into battle threads belies the entire point of their character. There's a limit but where that limit is has no definition to what will and won't work. Could lose to Ultraman, could lose to Darkseid. Doesn't matter. It doesn't touch on what they do or what he does. It doesn't explain his metaphysical presence and power. We'll forget the metaphysical nature of Darkseid since every other writer did as well but it's not as blatant unless you interpret the panels as getting erased.
With Superman he's supposed to represent that even with every other story in history feeding someone so they can erase it all, his story will adapt and overcome. And that includes classics like Mein Kampf presumably.
It's not a tangible concept that has edges that can be leapfrogged into the next. It's bigger than feats and why you see so many different uses of it.
What makes that difficult is using it in threads. If someone deletes 30 omniverses and physically shoves his fist up CDTM's butthole so far that it looks like CDdad's nub, then that character is more impressive by feats by far than Thought Robot and you can argue they win easily. But taking Thought Robot as a concept to represent the ultimate would have him adapt and overcome as he's the ultimate answer to anything.
Logically it should have limits like the Overvoid itself, but if Morrison were writing it I've no doubt he'd do something with pages or turn him into a comic book or something stupid. It allows your minds to create your own headcanon and imagine and that's what Morrison wants. It can beat anything if you can think it. Ironically it's the antithesis to what normal comic debating is.
What Perpetua is limited by is the same thing she excels at; being a comic character limited by comics. Snyder is too stupid to fully understand what he thinks he's going for so instead of creativity you have an increase in scope and power. Her feats exceed Thought Robots, and her scale and whatnot. By every measurable metric she exceeds him. Even the story aspect he wants his characters to benefit from. But it's the story of the characters and not the stories of what they represent and mean to a grander scale.
It's like taking Carver9 and saying he's a Hulk fan who has a blackface and hands and possibly feet but the soles of his feet and palms of his hands are white. You described Carver but simply describing Carver doesn't represent what he means. Every person, child, dog, 3 lizards and 1:1 sexdoll he has touched represent Carver. What Carver looks like, has done, will do and his impact on the world, KMC and local orphanages are part of that. It's not just Carver walked to the store and bought 2 melons to stick his dick in. It's Carver walked to the store, and some kid kicked the chair out from under them across the city because they couldn't erase the memories and the cashier was creeped out and cheated on her husband later that week and ruined her marriage because her friend invited her out after hearing the story of this guy dry thrusting a cantaloupe in her aisle while winking at her. It's this accurate second hand story about Carver. It's your reaction, it's everything.
It's hard to convey that in a story and that's the difference between what Snyder tries to do and what Morrison does.
There's two different dialogues here and I don't think either are wrong with how they're going about it. Unique battle. Perpetua wins in a typical comic battle. Thought Robot wins based on whatever real world emotions you want to apply to him.
The question is; has Snyder covered enough bases to encompass what Morrison has written and Thought Robot represents? He's tried but I don't feel good about that being a yes answer. That's why I don't think Perpetua can come to the metaphysical and win in that regard too.
What you put more stock into is who wins but it's a nice break from the monotomy nonetheless. Everyone is right, everyone is wrong. Except Alberto who understands nothing about either character - he's 100 percent wrong no matter what character he says.
Originally posted by One Big Mob
When Morrison writes metaphysical he means it as a concept that comes out of the page and represents more than what he portrayed. He is literally fueling his story with the greatest story of what he perceives all time. The idea of Superman is the greatest story or idea that can exist under his pen. It is the antithesis of nothingness that erodes or eats that story and destroys all future stories. This idea will eclipse and persist past everything else. It's the idea that even when everything else gets erased that Superman will exist. If comics got erased the idea is that Superman would exist. In this story Superman's story was greater than total oblivion.
Obviously Batman is timeless as well and would exist as long but Morrison was using Superman as the ultimate foil.As far as feats and what he did go? Not so great. That's why the metaphysical is important because it's whatever you want it to be. Morrison wrote it that way as well. He wrote it to represent heroism and stories. If you can think of the most powerful idea that exists be that hope, love, freedom or scatporn; Superman represents that in the story.
A good contrast to a typical usage in metaphysical vs actual metaphysics is also a Morrison example in Ultra Comics. That comic was metaphysical in that it was talking to the "real world" of the comic and the readers in that sense were meant to represent our world. It's typically used that there's a real world beyond comics and that's a wink and a nudge to us. What Morrison also layered on is that it was also talking to "us" - the Carver9s of his world. The comic was for DC's normal "real world" and our real world. You can see this with the whole "don't read this or..." and Ultra realizing he needs to actually manipulate the comic while being back in his world/comic panels getting erased. I think that's a good example of layering and purposes while understanding the depths that Morrison will go and his intents.
Other examples are usually comedy like Mxy, She-Hulk, Deadpool etc. Punching writers while being beholden to writers in the next book. But Morrison is entirely serious with his application so it's an integral part.
And on the note of people like Ultra Comics; because they don't have typical feats you can't exactly quantify the power. Them getting put into battle threads belies the entire point of their character. There's a limit but where that limit is has no definition to what will and won't work. Could lose to Ultraman, could lose to Darkseid. Doesn't matter. It doesn't touch on what they do or what he does. It doesn't explain his metaphysical presence and power. We'll forget the metaphysical nature of Darkseid since every other writer did as well but it's not as blatant unless you interpret the panels as getting erased.
With Superman he's supposed to represent that even with every other story in history feeding someone so they can erase it all, his story will adapt and overcome. And that includes classics like Mein Kampf presumably.
It's not a tangible concept that has edges that can be leapfrogged into the next. It's bigger than feats and why you see so many different uses of it.
What makes that difficult is using it in threads. If someone deletes 30 omniverses and physically shoves his fist up CDTM's butthole so far that it looks like CDdad's nub, then that character is more impressive by feats by far than Thought Robot and you can argue they win easily. But taking Thought Robot as a concept to represent the ultimate would have him adapt and overcome as he's the ultimate answer to anything.
Logically it should have limits like the Overvoid itself, but if Morrison were writing it I've no doubt he'd do something with pages or turn him into a comic book or something stupid. It allows your minds to create your own headcanon and imagine and that's what Morrison wants. It can beat anything if you can think it. Ironically it's the antithesis to what normal comic debating is.
What Perpetua is limited by is the same thing she excels at; being a comic character limited by comics. Snyder is too stupid to fully understand what he thinks he's going for so instead of creativity you have an increase in scope and power. Her feats exceed Thought Robots, and her scale and whatnot. By every measurable metric she exceeds him. Even the story aspect he wants his characters to benefit from. But it's the story of the characters and not the stories of what they represent and mean to a grander scale.
It's like taking Carver9 and saying he's a Hulk fan who has a blackface and hands and possibly feet but the soles of his feet and palms of his hands are white. You described Carver but simply describing Carver doesn't represent what he means. Every person, child, dog, 3 lizards and 1:1 sexdoll he has touched represent Carver. What Carver looks like, has done, will do and his impact on the world, KMC and local orphanages are part of that. It's not just Carver walked to the store and bought 2 melons to stick his dick in. It's Carver walked to the store, and some kid kicked the chair out from under them across the city because they couldn't erase the memories and the cashier was creeped out and cheated on her husband later that week and ruined her marriage because her friend invited her out after hearing the story of this guy dry thrusting a cantaloupe in her aisle while winking at her. It's this accurate second hand story about Carver. It's your reaction, it's everything.
It's hard to convey that in a story and that's the difference between what Snyder tries to do and what Morrison does.
There's two different dialogues here and I don't think either are wrong with how they're going about it. Unique battle. Perpetua wins in a typical comic battle. Thought Robot wins based on whatever real world emotions you want to apply to him.
The question is; has Snyder covered enough bases to encompass what Morrison has written and Thought Robot represents? He's tried but I don't feel good about that being a yes answer. That's why I don't think Perpetua can come to the metaphysical and win in that regard too.
What you put more stock into is who wins but it's a nice break from the monotomy nonetheless. Everyone is right, everyone is wrong. Except Alberto who understands nothing about either character - he's 100 percent wrong no matter what character he says.
This is why I like Thor and Hulk's characters way more
Superman has been written to a ridiculous state. and he is still wearing that lame ass outfit.
Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ👆
I”ll have a response up sometime tomorrow @Phil. To the points of mine you did respond to, anyway.
As I mentioned, I don't have time to take days off to write essays. It looks good and gives a very good perspective on your overall opinion, but it's not very useful in having an actual discussion, so it's easier to just point out the foundation is based on incorrect information.
It would be better if you respond quicker and on point. We'll go through this one by one.
Originally posted by One Big MobThis is excellent, as always.
When Morrison writes metaphysical he means it as a concept that comes out of the page and represents more than what he portrayed. He is literally fueling his story with the greatest story of what he perceives all time. The idea of Superman is the greatest story or idea that can exist under his pen. It is the antithesis of nothingness that erodes or eats that story and destroys all future stories. This idea will eclipse and persist past everything else. It's the idea that even when everything else gets erased that Superman will exist. If comics got erased the idea is that Superman would exist. In this story Superman's story was greater than total oblivion.
Obviously Batman is timeless as well and would exist as long but Morrison was using Superman as the ultimate foil.As far as feats and what he did go? Not so great. That's why the metaphysical is important because it's whatever you want it to be. Morrison wrote it that way as well. He wrote it to represent heroism and stories. If you can think of the most powerful idea that exists be that hope, love, freedom or scatporn; Superman represents that in the story.
A good contrast to a typical usage in metaphysical vs actual metaphysics is also a Morrison example in Ultra Comics. That comic was metaphysical in that it was talking to the "real world" of the comic and the readers in that sense were meant to represent our world. It's typically used that there's a real world beyond comics and that's a wink and a nudge to us. What Morrison also layered on is that it was also talking to "us" - the Carver9s of his world. The comic was for DC's normal "real world" and our real world. You can see this with the whole "don't read this or..." and Ultra realizing he needs to actually manipulate the comic while being back in his world/comic panels getting erased. I think that's a good example of layering and purposes while understanding the depths that Morrison will go and his intents.
Other examples are usually comedy like Mxy, She-Hulk, Deadpool etc. Punching writers while being beholden to writers in the next book. But Morrison is entirely serious with his application so it's an integral part.
And on the note of people like Ultra Comics; because they don't have typical feats you can't exactly quantify the power. Them getting put into battle threads belies the entire point of their character. There's a limit but where that limit is has no definition to what will and won't work. Could lose to Ultraman, could lose to Darkseid. Doesn't matter. It doesn't touch on what they do or what he does. It doesn't explain his metaphysical presence and power. We'll forget the metaphysical nature of Darkseid since every other writer did as well but it's not as blatant unless you interpret the panels as getting erased.
With Superman he's supposed to represent that even with every other story in history feeding someone so they can erase it all, his story will adapt and overcome. And that includes classics like Mein Kampf presumably.
It's not a tangible concept that has edges that can be leapfrogged into the next. It's bigger than feats and why you see so many different uses of it.
What makes that difficult is using it in threads. If someone deletes 30 omniverses and physically shoves his fist up CDTM's butthole so far that it looks like CDdad's nub, then that character is more impressive by feats by far than Thought Robot and you can argue they win easily. But taking Thought Robot as a concept to represent the ultimate would have him adapt and overcome as he's the ultimate answer to anything.
Logically it should have limits like the Overvoid itself, but if Morrison were writing it I've no doubt he'd do something with pages or turn him into a comic book or something stupid. It allows your minds to create your own headcanon and imagine and that's what Morrison wants. It can beat anything if you can think it. Ironically it's the antithesis to what normal comic debating is.
What Perpetua is limited by is the same thing she excels at; being a comic character limited by comics. Snyder is too stupid to fully understand what he thinks he's going for so instead of creativity you have an increase in scope and power. Her feats exceed Thought Robots, and her scale and whatnot. By every measurable metric she exceeds him. Even the story aspect he wants his characters to benefit from. But it's the story of the characters and not the stories of what they represent and mean to a grander scale.
It's like taking Carver9 and saying he's a Hulk fan who has a blackface and hands and possibly feet but the soles of his feet and palms of his hands are white. You described Carver but simply describing Carver doesn't represent what he means. Every person, child, dog, 3 lizards and 1:1 sexdoll he has touched represent Carver. What Carver looks like, has done, will do and his impact on the world, KMC and local orphanages are part of that. It's not just Carver walked to the store and bought 2 melons to stick his dick in. It's Carver walked to the store, and some kid kicked the chair out from under them across the city because they couldn't erase the memories and the cashier was creeped out and cheated on her husband later that week and ruined her marriage because her friend invited her out after hearing the story of this guy dry thrusting a cantaloupe in her aisle while winking at her. It's this accurate second hand story about Carver. It's your reaction, it's everything.
It's hard to convey that in a story and that's the difference between what Snyder tries to do and what Morrison does.
There's two different dialogues here and I don't think either are wrong with how they're going about it. Unique battle. Perpetua wins in a typical comic battle. Thought Robot wins based on whatever real world emotions you want to apply to him.
The question is; has Snyder covered enough bases to encompass what Morrison has written and Thought Robot represents? He's tried but I don't feel good about that being a yes answer. That's why I don't think Perpetua can come to the metaphysical and win in that regard too.
What you put more stock into is who wins but it's a nice break from the monotomy nonetheless. Everyone is right, everyone is wrong. Except Alberto who understands nothing about either character - he's 100 percent wrong no matter what character he says.
Logically it should have limits like the Overvoid itself, but if Morrison were writing it I've no doubt he'd do something with pages or turn him into a comic book or something stupid.
but the limits are blurred in this case. the robot, and what is at the heart of it, what it represents, it transcends comics. we have always been aware that the writer is the 'ultimate' god in comics, and the overvoid is only a couple pencil strokes away from being just a part of the next 'bigger thing'.
with the robot, there IS no 'next bigger thing'. why? because NOTHING IN COMICS CAN EXIST THAT IS BIGGER THAN "STORY".
the robot can be seen, from a certain perspective, as the writer made manifest--ALL writers. there is no way--in the real world OR on panel--to 'outdo' this. you would need to literally eliminate the idea of superman's story from real world consciousness.
it's...brilliant, one of the truly brilliant ideas in comics. gaiman toyed with the idea of "story" in sandman as well, but his ideas weren't nearly as avant garde as morrison's ideas.
Originally posted by leonidasYep. 👆
but the limits are blurred in this case. the robot, and what is at the heart of it, what it represents, it transcends comics. we have always been aware that the writer is the 'ultimate' god in comics, and the overvoid is only a couple pencil strokes away from being just a part of the next 'bigger thing'.with the robot, there IS no 'next bigger thing'. why? because NOTHING IN COMICS CAN EXIST THAT IS BIGGER THAN "STORY".
the robot can be seen, from a certain perspective, as the writer made manifest--ALL writers. there is no way--in the real world OR on panel--to 'outdo' this. you would need to literally eliminate the idea of superman's story from real world consciousness.
it's...brilliant, one of the truly brilliant ideas in comics. gaiman toyed with the idea of "story" in sandman as well, but his ideas weren't nearly as avant garde as morrison's ideas.
The story of the Thought Robot is the real world story that was created by humanity of the man who cannot be beat. Morrison literally says as much:
First off, you've spoken about the power of story, and the power of the DC Universe in particular, and expressed a certain level of awe at how these creations and these stories outlast their creators significantly. This sentiment seems to play out directly when Zillo Valla faces down Mandrakk's dream of the ultimate void by telling him she found a story in the germ world that's unstoppable and indestructible, about a child rocketed to Earth from a doomed planet. Is that pretty much what you were going for there?Morrison: Yeah, pretty much. The fact that in the DC Universe there is a story about a genuinely good and moral man who can't be beat, and the fact that the DC Universe exists in the real world means that humanity made up a story about a genuinely moral man who can't be beat. That's a really cool story to learn from, especially when we're under a lot of pressure in the world today from lots of angles. So again, like I said to you earlier, it's the idea of acknowledging a genuine depth of reality to these fictions. It's not the fourth wall, it's not post-modern or meta – I hate those terms because I think they just undermine the simple notion that everything we can experience is real, including dreams and stories. These characters are in here, in the universe with us, and they have s--t to tell us. And that's what I find really exciting. They're real in the sense that you can hold them in your hands and interact with them. They don't need to pretend to live in New York. It's much more real than that – they're actually alive in our hands.
That's the whole point of the Thought Robot. Why he adapts -- even against the devourer of story, the ultimate evil. The very idea of Superman that humanity created -- the guy who will always win, whose story is unbeatable. He will always adapt against any threat.
Originally posted by leonidas👆 The story really doesn't click until you begin to wrap your head around all of its 'metaness'... Which is subsequently integral to understanding the levels at which these characters were intended to be operating.
but the limits are blurred in this case. the robot, and what is at the heart of it, what it represents, it transcends comics. we have always been aware that the writer is the 'ultimate' god in comics, and the overvoid is only a couple pencil strokes away from being just a part of the next 'bigger thing'.with the robot, there IS no 'next bigger thing'. why? because NOTHING IN COMICS CAN EXIST THAT IS BIGGER THAN "STORY".
the robot can be seen, from a certain perspective, as the writer made manifest--ALL writers. there is no way--in the real world OR on panel--to 'outdo' this. you would need to literally eliminate the idea of superman's story from real world consciousness.
it's...brilliant, one of the truly brilliant ideas in comics. gaiman toyed with the idea of "story" in sandman as well, but his ideas weren't nearly as avant garde as morrison's ideas.
Mandrakk is the ultimate antithesis of the plot itself: a vampiric hyper-consumer, who literally feasts upon the very thing that gives life to fiction within DC(ie. the concept of 'story' in its purest form.) To put it another way, Mandrakk devoured the very ideas that we, the audience, perceive on the comic book page... So from that perspective there was no greater threat; no greater entropy.
Thought-Robot is Mandrakk's counterpoint: it represents a story *so* powerful that it can adapt to defeat any threat, ever... Even if that threat metafictionally feeds upon the very concept that brought him into being. Dax Novu realized the power of Superman's story when he first made contact with the 'germ world'. He knew that if/when he was corrupted, Superman's hyper-story was the *only* thing in existence that could overcome him -- so he designed THE quintessential deus ex machina to channel that story: Thought-Robot, thereby engineering his own defeat.
In the end, it comes down to the idea of Superman defeating the idea of killing him... And this is, quite literally, something that *only* Superman could do.
Originally posted by Galan007Therein lies the problem [which I will get to, eventually, step by step]. And Xsupreme not differentiating between literal metafictional idea of the story of Superman being put into the pure thought form of the TR -- and confusing it with "Golden Wonder Woman was powered by that idea and all the others!". It is a fundamental misunderstanding of both stories and what they were powered by.
👆 The story really doesn't click until you begin to wrap your head around all of its 'metaness'... Which is subsequently integral to understanding the levels at which these characters were intended to be operating.
Originally posted by leonidas
but the limits are blurred in this case. the robot, and what is at the heart of it, what it represents, it transcends comics. we have always been aware that the writer is the 'ultimate' god in comics, and the overvoid is only a couple pencil strokes away from being just a part of the next 'bigger thing'.with the robot, there IS no 'next bigger thing'. why? because NOTHING IN COMICS CAN EXIST THAT IS BIGGER THAN "STORY".
the robot can be seen, from a certain perspective, as the writer made manifest--ALL writers. there is no way--in the real world OR on panel--to 'outdo' this. you would need to literally eliminate the idea of superman's story from real world consciousness.
it's...brilliant, one of the truly brilliant ideas in comics. gaiman toyed with the idea of "story" in sandman as well, but his ideas weren't nearly as avant garde as morrison's ideas.
It's not the meta aspect of it, it's just thinking about Thought Robot essentially being a tiny scab. Imagine if after shooting up heroin your needle scab peeled off and started tossing you around. Fueled by the greatest rock song writing story of all time:
Heroin
That's what I mean by logically. I'd like to think needle scabs and meth scabs would be some sort of grey area but probably not delving into the metaphysical aspect of it.
lolYou wanna have a discussion, or do you just wanna take continuously take days off and write walls of text?
But -- at least you took my advice and read it again.
The last one took me ~ 3 hours to make, this next one coming also took me about ~3 hours. I don”t see the difference between a “discussion” and typing up a post with words and scans to discuss two fictional characters. You can write single paragraph responses that supposedly tear apart my whole post, and I”ll keep writing what I write.
The difference is we can talk each individual idea in a quick exchange of opinions instead of a monologue or, even worse, a quote/unquote 4 post per person each time nightmare for 4 weeks.
In 1h-2h max we'd go through everything one step at a time if you don't just vanish every few posts to spend another 3 hours typing stuff. Stay here 2 hours, continuously, and let's get through it.
Then, once individual opinions are clear and factual we can look at the bigger picture.
That is, of course, if you want a discussion. If essays are your thing, and you want a "this is my opinion" I'm fine with that, too.
We are engaging in a discussion. I”m just using scans and describing concepts at length because there are other people reading this thread who would probably like scans/explanations for context, and based on your last response, I figured my next post should have scans and explanations to make things as clear as possible.