- 3,372
- 3,200
Yep, that's how I perceive it.
-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
General DC Comics Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Confluctor
- Start date
-
- Tags
- dc comics
- 222
- 148
Morrison directly called him God, separate from Overvoid and Source
Beyond that crumbling ledge in Monitor-World, those concepts don't exist and it's all non-dual Monitor mind, or God, or Kirby's Source, in which all contradictions are resolved into unity. It's funny, the more I talk about it, the more I'm getting into it!
There is a misconception in the community that it is believed that Presence is the absolute of Dc
- 222
- 148
The Unknowable is still the creator who drew the crack on the Overvoid, nothing has changed
- 3,372
- 3,200
Nothing has been confirmed.
- 3,240
- 2,471
Could be, has not been stated. We don’t know who did it, so it’s unknown to us. May not be a Creator entity at all. I don’t think any being superseded the Overvoid on how Morrison’s described what’s it was suppose to be. It’s just didn’t know who drew a flaw on it.
- 222
- 148
His concept of the creator remains the same
In the case of comic book stories, it's the war between white page and ink. And who's to say that the page might want that particular story drawn on it? [laughs] What happens if the page is a bit pissed off at the story that's drawn on it? So I thought of the page as God. The idea being that the Overvoid – as we called it in Final Crisis - of the white page as a space is sort of God. And it's condensing stories out of itself because it finds inside its own gigantic white space, self-absorbed pristine consciousness, it finds this little stain or mark, this DC Multiverse somebody has 'drawn'. And it starts investigating, and it's just shocked with what it sees, with all the crazy activity and signifying going on in there. It then tries to protect itself from the seething contact with 'story' and imagines a race of beings, 'angels' or 'monitors' (another word for angel, of course) to function as an interface between its own giant eternal magnificence and this tiny, weird crawling anthill of life and significance that is the DC Multiverse.
In the case of comic book stories, it's the war between white page and ink. And who's to say that the page might want that particular story drawn on it? [laughs] What happens if the page is a bit pissed off at the story that's drawn on it? So I thought of the page as God. The idea being that the Overvoid – as we called it in Final Crisis - of the white page as a space is sort of God. And it's condensing stories out of itself because it finds inside its own gigantic white space, self-absorbed pristine consciousness, it finds this little stain or mark, this DC Multiverse somebody has 'drawn'. And it starts investigating, and it's just shocked with what it sees, with all the crazy activity and signifying going on in there. It then tries to protect itself from the seething contact with 'story' and imagines a race of beings, 'angels' or 'monitors' (another word for angel, of course) to function as an interface between its own giant eternal magnificence and this tiny, weird crawling anthill of life and significance that is the DC Multiverse.
- 3,240
- 2,471
I’m not trying to sound prude. However, his statement is saying God is also called Source and Overvoid as synonyms to each other. “Or” being the supplement word to describe it.
- 222
- 148
Morrison confirmed that the multiverse has been drawn
- 3,240
- 2,471
He’s literally calling the Page(Overvoid) God in the context of Final Crisis.
- 3,372
- 3,200
He also said this in an interview.
- 222
- 148
It is worth remembering that they are one. But in this case he divided them by name
- 3,240
- 2,471
Which means they’re still the same thing. He is making a point that you can call them by different names.
- 222
- 148
Yes. But I'm talking about the moment where he spoke about these three entities separately
- 3,240
- 2,471
He’s calling the same entity by different names. Nothing else.
- 222
- 148
Which does not contradict the old description of the Unknowable
- 222
- 148
The Unknowable is obviously stronger and out of reach of the Overvoid and the Source. It's not even on the map
- 3,240
- 2,471
“Obviously?” That’s just assumption.
It’s also on the Map. Outside the Multiverse is those three. The Map is not drawn to scale. The Overvoid is not the size of a comic book paper and the Unknowable outside there in the white infinite page like Overvoid and Source. It’s probably because it’s called Unknowable that we don’t know where it is specifically or what it is.
- 222
- 148
The Overvoid cannot recognize him, and for God he is only paper, and the Source is only ink. I mean, even Source and Overvoid are written on the map
- 3,240
- 2,471
To remain “Unknowable” would lose its meaning because calling a white part unknowable would make it known to be the same as the other two.
Also, the White Page we see outside the Multiverse where it explicitly highlights on the Map “out there” beyond the Source Wall are the three. The Map is meant to depict what it’s sort of looks like, it’s not as I mentioned, drawn to scale. The Map technically would be infinite and include the Unknown label buts it’s being read off from a Comicbook. It also isn’t mentioned that the Source is the “Ink.”
- 1,304
- 1,041
That wasn’t the argument. I said that the title of God given to the Smile isn’t being used interchangeably with God as in the Presence because it’s directly differentiated on the panel. I’ve even written the text and highlighted the differentiation to make it as visible as possible. The Smile being considered a place in the same scan only further supports the already existing differentiation between the two, along with all of the other things I mentioned such as The Presence being simply a part of a Godhead and being unable to kill beings of the CU who also outright mock the belief that he’s supreme. So the argument being made here that “it’s called God so it’s the Presence” is wrong because it’s out of context. Spectres Oversoul also isn’t The Smile so I don’t know why that keeps getting brought up.
- 222
- 148
This strongly characterizes him as a more distant being or entity, this is normal for an absolute god
- 3,240
- 2,471
Except your making up you’re own headcanon trying to elude that scan meant the Presence in Doctor Fate when Matteis hasn’t mentioned the Presence by name in that comic.
Spectre comics is when it actually appeared the full Godhead. In Phantom Stranger, God assumed form in the form of a Dog, who represent the Voice, an aspect of the Presence/God.
You’re acquitting the Voice who is in the Creation to equal the being that transcends all forms, thoughts, and matter as full Godhead to the Dog?
- 27
- 16
Point out the contradictions between these cosmologies, and not that “they are just different”.
- 3,240
- 2,471
Matteis writes freely in most aspect take his inspiration from religion views rather than what other authors implemented other than the basic origin and powers of characters. No one writes his characters like he does nor follow the theory that Meher Baba(his spiritual teacher) did propose.
- 27
- 16
You don't understand what I'm writing about, do you? I know that even without your words, but how does this cancel the placement of one cosmology into another? For example, the scale of John’s cosmology don't extend beyond the SOG, and therefore fits well into Morrison’s.
- 3,240
- 2,471
You asked of the previous person said. Which he/she included the work of Matteis. I was specifically going in for his works and why it can’t tie in with the others. The rest can be answered by whom you asked the question to. Rest assured I know why you’re asking for about continuity and my response certainly didn’t come from nothing about your points.
- 7,904
- 14,966
Fully agree with this.
I disagree. The map directly states that the Source is the Overvoid, and the Overvoid was directly called "Unknowable" in Final Crisis. It seems very natural IMO that the best reading of that section is that those three are one and the same.
- 3,240
- 2,471
I don’t really disagree but the point of the map is locations of things. Those three are outside beyond the Multiverse, I don’t think the Map is saying they’re the same thing because that wasn’t the point.
I don’t really think the Unknowable is the same thing. I do think that Overvoid, Source, and Unknowable, I feel are representation of the infinite page/Void represented differently. Equal in status and hierarchy but not exactly the same thing.
Last edited:
- 3,240
- 2,471
Also, the Unknowable like the Source is a title to a certain thing outside the Multiverse. It’s not meant to be equated, if it’s describes as an adjective. So an unknowable Monitor wouldn’t refer to the Unknowable.
- 168,579
- 77,394
I also agree with this.
- 222
- 148
Since he is still writing his work within a specific universe, his work will be subject to the official cosmology that has been established literally on a legal level. If some author says that his character will be stronger than Overvoid (without changing the cosmology at the official level), then these words will not have any weight (with the exception of such wikis) until the editors accept this on a more thorough level. All gods still live in the Sphere of the Gods, which means that any statements about God being outside the DC multiverse without editorial acceptance will be false.
Morrison rolled back the canon and Starlin's words that Darkseid fought the Source, which at that moment was the other side of life. This was accepted as a given on the wiki, canceling Starlin's words, although he is the same author as DeMatteis. Why then at certain moments the words of the authors are taken over the rest of the universe, and some authors are canceled in favor of something else?
Why does the cosmology of one author (although no different cosmologies exist, it is just someone else’s invention) stands above the official cosmology of another author, which the editors accepted?
- 3,240
- 2,471
There shouldn’t a split in the first place by your logic.
I don’t see where “all” is mentioned especially if one wasn’t shape by beliefs. The core of the Sphere runs on belief and magic which a certain God transcends especially since it was established that God’s power was used by beings beyond the Gods to create the Multiverse which eventually the Sphere pop as a result.
Except the story highlights that was not the full Source? A glimpse of what the Source entailed which was later added since the Source is the creator and precognitor of both Life and Anti-Life and is contained by it. What happen in Death of the New Gods was just both side of the aspect of the Source were separated by the three Gods of Roman, Norse, and Greek. No conherent scaling if you believed that these Gods > Source.
The intention isn’t to say different cosmology rather different interpretation of a cosmology.
- 27
- 16
And why?
- 3,240
- 2,471
- 2,168
- 2,128
Grant has said a couple of times that the map is supposed to follow some Kabbalistic attributes in nature, the Kabbalah posits that God has about three aspects, or forms that it took. The Ain is the non-existence preceding God, the ain sof is God, and the ain sof aur is the infinite light of God.
Grant, I believe, did personally think of the Source as the Ain Soph Aur, the infinite light (or in this case, energy) of God. And the map does say that there is specifically three things beyond the Source wall, which Grant has called God.
Due to the Kabbalah calling these three manifestations "God", I believe Grant probably also called the Source, "the unknowable" and the Overvoid "God". Hence, why the Source was referred to as the Overvoid or the white page multiple times, it's simply synonymous with God.
Grant, I believe, did personally think of the Source as the Ain Soph Aur, the infinite light (or in this case, energy) of God. And the map does say that there is specifically three things beyond the Source wall, which Grant has called God.
Due to the Kabbalah calling these three manifestations "God", I believe Grant probably also called the Source, "the unknowable" and the Overvoid "God". Hence, why the Source was referred to as the Overvoid or the white page multiple times, it's simply synonymous with God.
- 27
- 16
Matteis writes freely in most aspect take his inspiration from religion views rather than what other authors implemented other than the basic origin and powers of characters.
Does drawing information from religion prevent one from placing one cosmology within another? Are you serious?
- 3,240
- 2,471
It creates an interpretation of how the Cosmology is defined based solely on the author intent. Any addition to contradict such notions is the reason for the split.
- 27
- 16
We are talking about placing one cosmology into another, and the fact that he mainly focuses on Christianity and Hinduism is in no way relevant.
- 3,240
- 2,471
The simple premise is that. How would you put one Cosmology with another, if the information on how the Cosmology is structured is contradicted with each other. If it weren’t such a problem, then the split shouldn’t ever had happen. Due to how Matteis writes, yes, the religious view is heavily needed.
