- 7,904
- 14,966
Considering we pretty recently went through a very large revisions that landed it squarely at 1-C, I'm going to say no, probably not.OK, I'll bite; I can agree on a 1-B cosmology for DC. Anyone else think the same here?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Considering we pretty recently went through a very large revisions that landed it squarely at 1-C, I'm going to say no, probably not.OK, I'll bite; I can agree on a 1-B cosmology for DC. Anyone else think the same here?
Changed my mind on adding the Trapper and Infinite Man fight, I think what I added should be ok. At least it looks a whole lot better than the current profile we have.Idk if we will count that since he was very quickly killed after a few more beams. More examples might be needed. You could probably find a comic where he takes attacks from comparable people
Are you proposing 1-B for the entire cosmology? Will the cosmologies separated in the revision be reunited?OK, I'll bite; I can agree on a 1-B cosmology for DC. Anyone else think the same here?
Yes, agreed.Considering we pretty recently went through a very large revisions that landed it squarely at 1-C, I'm going to say no, probably not.
I agree with thisAnimal Man could technically get Morrison to at least High 1-B. If we count things based on context rather than direct implication Vertigo may be 1-A as well. Matteis, I have been talking to a lot is in my opinion 1-A.
I really now don't see the need to split this writer's notion or else the same has to apply to every other verse including Marvel.
We have already thoroughly went through why it is necessary in our DC Comics Cosmology page.Animal Man could technically get Morrison to at least High 1-B. If we count things based on context rather than direct implication Vertigo may be 1-A as well. Matteis, I have been talking to a lot is in my opinion 1-A.
I really now don't see the need to split this writer's notion or else the same has to apply to every other verse including Marvel.
I think anyone who has read it understood “why.” This isn't to say many not almost all do not agree simply due to factoring in some things such as contradictions between authors. Plus I added the incentive it happened to DC for that reason it should inadvertently apply to every verse. It's become less and less useable a “split” Cosmology which I had for a long time just gone with but overall I never thought it was too great of an idea.We have already thoroughly went through why it is necessary in our DC Comics Cosmology page.
This is, IMO, the very crucial point. There is very little continuity between Animal Man and the main-stream cosmology contributions that Grant made in the 2000s. He kept Limbo, which is well and good, but a great deal of the avant-garde experimental mythicism he introduced in his earlier works were completely abandoned outside of their individual comic runs.even if many fans would likely find it convenient in order to maximise statistics.
This is, IMO, the very crucial point. There is very little continuity between Animal Man and the main-stream cosmology contributions that Grant made in the 2000s. He kept Limbo, which is well and good, but a great deal of the avant-garde experimental mythicism he introduced in his earlier works were completely abandoned outside of their individual comic runs.
I see it largely as being motivated by a desire to see beloved characters or series with higher tiers than is really ever demonstrated in these works themselves, and I consider it a big part of our job to be a bulwark against that kind of thing.
Hey, I just wanted to give my 2 cents on something. So I was looking over the recent staff discussion, and one of the herald feats was characters potentially scaling to the phantom zone. This was even considered one of the more "straightforward" feats among both supporters and dissidents, with the phantom zone having statements for being infinite in size. But honestly, I'm starting to disagree that it warrants high 3-A.
So, this is the statement for the phantom zone being infinite, and let me quote it verbatim.
So here's my major gripe. The whole point of feats on this wiki that deal with "infinite" anything is that characaters can scale to notions that span infinitely far, vast, or high. However, the phantom zone is described as an "unregion of infinitely compressed space." This seems like the opposite of spanning infinitely wide, no? If the phantom zone is infinitely compressed, that means that rather than its substance spanning infinite outwards, its space actually folds in on itself infinitely. Even googling "compressed space relativity," all I can find are articles about the fabric of space-time curving in on itself. I honestly don't think a realm being stated to be compressed infinitely holds the same connotations as this wiki's notions of high 3-A, which describes spaces that are infinitely expansive.
One of the supporting evidences for high 3-A phantom zone is how it's described as an anti-universe, implying that it shares enough characteristics with a normal universe to warrant a distinction (likely universal size), but I think this statement suggests the opposite. When you combine that fact with how the phantom zone was stated to be "dimensionless," along with how it's called an "unregion," I think everything considered, the phantom zone is a spaceless, timeless void with no tierable value. These are just my thoughts, of course.
That's fine because we have a lot more statements of the Phantom Zone being infinite or near infinite:
Adventure Comics vol 2 (2009) #11 refers to it as Endless
Action comics #846 calls it endless
Action Comics Annual #11 calls it Endless
Action Comics Annual #12 calls it "Infinite"
In Superman vol 2 (1987) #214: For Tomorrow, Zod calls it Limitless
In Action comics #754, Superman describes it as "near infinite"
The Phantom Zone #1 (Pre-Crisis) calls it "Boundless"
The godsphere isn't truly platonic because it has space right?
I have no idea, I can't find the full one, but I have seen people try to get the godsphere to outer because its a platonic archetypal realm. But this kind of debunks all of that, even though Platonism doesn't scale that high anyway.Who is speaking with Batman in that scan?
I’m pretty sure Wally even used time stop on Darkest Knight in the 6th dimension.I have no idea, I can't find the full one, but I have seen people try to get the godsphere to outer because its a platonic archetypal realm. But this kind of debunks all of that, even though Platonism doesn't scale that high anyway.
It's also not a Platonic realm because it was created and has been destroyed. In Platonism concepts are eternal and unchanging.but I have seen people try to get the godsphere to outer because its a platonic archetypal realm. But this kind of debunks all of that, even though Platonism doesn't scale that high anyway.
I see, so what does the scan mean when it says the godsphere is a platonic archetypal realm? Is that just fancy wording for something else? Or is there another interpretation?It's also not a Platonic realm because it was created and has been destroyed. In Platonism concepts are eternal and unchanging.
Grant Morrison incorporated dozens of different mythologies, theories, and concepts into his work. But they were rarely/never perfect reflections of the real world description of those ideas.I see, so what does the scan mean when it says the godsphere is a platonic archetypal realm? Is that just fancy wording for something else? Or is there another interpretation?
It depends entirely on the interpretation of the work. It would really be hard to say something is X, if no one read X in the original language and knew the context as they were being developed as with Plato's works. Most of what people understand as platonic interpretation is in fact interpretation from Neo-Platonic authors who over literally centuries, were understood as just being retelling Plato's works, but recently (As in the last two centuries) have started to be understood as being its own branch that didn't notice that their works basically told something that went completely beyond the scope of what was described in Plato's works. And yet most of the modern interpretation still comes from those (If you are talking about emanations, for example, you are talking about Neoplatonic understandings of Plato's works).So, what did he mean by it? Hard to say. It could just he flowery language, he may have intended for it to be full blown Platonism (but not have recognized why that wasn't possible) or something else.
Agreed. This is something that even highly educated scholars see differently so it's hard to generalize in terms of it's relationship to DC. It would be better to focus less on what words Batman used to describe the Sphere and try to determine what qualities it can definitively been shown to have, regardless of whether they fit one specific possible framework of "Platonic."If anything, if there's a problem with the way it's depicted in DC (And I'm sure it has a lot of problems), these problems are in a way also seen in Plato's own works and have been a point of discussion by different scholars with totally different interpretations.
I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't really one for any of them. The cosmic beings were given a lot of weird tiers and abilities before Ant and I cleaned it upWhat's the Transduality justifications for Dream of the Endless, Father Time, and Perpetua?
@Antvasima Do I have permission to remove Transduality from their profiles?I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't really one for any of them. The cosmic beings were given a lot of weird tiers and abilities before Ant and I cleaned it up
Keenan constantly appears in Action Comics and Superman sagas so yes.Is new superman comic canon?