• 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.

J.M. DeMatteis (Marvel Cosmology Split)

Swordsaint456 said:
So, where would TOAA place on the DeMatties side, and the standard side?
Click to expand...
That’s the thing, for DeMatteis, he doesn’t exist. If he were to then that would be confusing where to place him since we’re going to mesh different ideas. If so, he may just be High 1-A in his Cosmology or 1-A for the main side without the DeMatteis Cosmology.

For the standard side, if the Cosmology remains the same(I highly doubt it) then he would stay where he is. So he would be High 1-A about seven or eight layers(as he currently is).
 
VeryGoofyToddler said:
That’s the thing, for DeMatteis, he doesn’t exist. If he were to then that would be confusing where to place him since we’re going to mesh different ideas. If so, he may just be High 1-A in his Cosmology or 1-A for the main side without the DeMatteis Cosmology.

For the standard side, if the Cosmology remains the same(I highly doubt it) then he would stay where he is. So he would be High 1-A about seven or eight layers(as he currently is).
Click to expand...
Thanks.
 
 
Okay. That will be hard to remember, but I will remove you from my list then. 🙏
 
Okay. That is unfortunate, but thanks anyway. 🙏
 
Antvasima said:
Well, for what it is worth, I support it. 🙏

@Ultima_Reality @Eficiente @Qawsedf234 @SuperAPM @Firestorm808 @EmperorRorepmeThree @LuciferDC099 @Deagonx @Elizio33 @MarvelFanatic119 @Catzlaflame @Lightning_XXI @Stefano4444 @LuciferX @Excellence616 @JohnCenaNation @ByAsura @Emirp sumitpo @Quantu @IdiosyncraticLawyer @PrinceofPein @Maverick_Zero_X @Robo432343 @LordTracer @Alonik @ProfectusInfinity @M3X_2.0 @PrinceStories @Asterotheology @Zensum @Hykuu @KingEzran @Dark-Carioca @AerrowStorm1 @Eseseso @Maverick_Zero_X @ObberGobb

We need some help here. 🙏
Click to expand...
I stated my opinion some pages back, but I'm on NHTKenshin and Alonik's side and strongly disagree with the arguments in the OP. My overall problem is that the split justifications are examples of differences between the cosmologies and not contradictions that are irreconciliable. Just because something isn't mentioned in the other cosmology, doesn't mean it's incompatible with that cosmology. Even then, both NHTKenshin and I explained in one of our responses why most of these examples of "cosmological differences" are actually very present in all cosmologies, to which OP admitted that indeed, these elements of the cosmologies aren't actually contradictory. Some of these arguments in particular, I find incredibly arbitrary, like the argument that one of DeMatteis's inspirations was a famous monk from India, and the fact that none of the other authors like Al Ewing mention being inspired by this monk means the cosmologies are incompatible???

1. The basis provided for splitting the cosmologies is extremely vague, and would indisputably provide grounds for virtually every storyline in Marvel to be split from one another. The argument "but we allowed DeMatteis's ideas to be split from DC and he writes the same across all his works" is just a cliché that isn't proven through the arguments given.

2. As Alonik also mentioned, one of the foremost issues here is that the split justifications in the OP go directly against Ultima's basis for a composite cosmology, which already explains why different stories use different religious inspirations and subtext.

And to restate what I already said, OP even admitted after a certain point that many of these split justifications aren't actually incompatible across cosmologies, but dismissed the examples of compatibility by nitpicking that these shared cosmology elements don't exactly, specifically, mention DeMatteis's religious inspirations. For instance, apparently the fact that all cosmologies mention DeMatteis's trademark "layers of dreams" doesn't matter, because the other cosmologies don't attach DeMatteis's religious subtext to that. Right now, since NHTKenshin said he would create a summary of his own, I'd prefer to wait until he's done to propose an alternative method of splitting the profiles without splitting the cosmologies.
 
I know it is a summary but none of what was said above is summarizing what I actually said.

Especially, this apparent notion:
ProfectusInfinity said:
1. The basis provided for splitting the cosmologies is extremely vague, and would indisputably provide grounds for virtually every storyline in Marvel to be split from one another. The argument "but we allowed DeMatteis's ideas to be split from DC and he writes the same across all his works" is just a cliché that isn't proven through the arguments given.
Click to expand...
Despite a huge chunk of the OP and condensed forms in the arguments, I answered it:

The Cosmology aspect is important because they're pretty much identical in every way in Marvel and DC and are only separated by name.

Example:

Divine Presence and Divine Creator also called God is the central figure in his Cosmology. A Oneness that underlines duality, precedes form, and always acts through some sort of Avatar. Literally, in Justice League Dark “Brahma-Dass” refers to God as a Magician that pulled Reality as his trick, and guess what? In Doctor Strange story they mentioned the concept of the Golden Age which surfaces across Silver Surfer, Man-Thing, and Moon Knight which in DC is mentioned several times as well. Into Shamballa literally calls God, a Magician, and that Reality is his trick, which is a shared element in his magical side of stories. Also, in an older Marvel story by DeMatteis, there's a character literally called “Shiva-Dass” as someone equal to “Brahma-Dass.”

Creation stories is exactly the same. God was unconscious then he had an urge then came everything: duality, consciousness, and Creation.

  • We have Oblivion describing Creation as coming from him and will return to him. Kind of weird since that's the exact description of the Sea of Brahma. Also, Mahapralaya and Pralaya have been referenced in both stories in the same manner: the dissolution of the Universe.
  • In Shamballa, Stephen Strange mentions Krishna's flute that will bring about Sleep. This idea was part of the “Night of Brahma” storyline in Doctor Fate, a vampire named Andrew Bennet played it to bring about Mahapralaya. Also, mentioned again in the Last One about the Krishna flute. The older story involving Shiva-Dass mentions the same flute as well. The weird thing is his Strange and Fate stories were almost released near each other in publication and that's not to mention that he was employed by both companies and went back and forth with his scripts between the companies.
  • Maya is in both companies. The same logic, the same name, and the same premise.
So, for the people telling me not to compare the two is one of my reasons. Then how are DeMatteis getting away with a composite Marvel Cosmology, but not DC? When his work is literally recycled and the same? The compression is very fair and very much should be a part of my reasoning.

I won't dismantle a summary, but it's not at all accurate.
 
I have one question if we are not separating DeMatteis's take of the Marvel Cosmology from the main continuity. DeMatteis clearly has a different view on Oblivion who is portrayed as the second most powerful force after God (the Void from which the Multiverse grew and to which it would return, and seeing the Multiverse as an illusion), unlike the main continuity's depiction of Oblivion which portrays him as equal to Eternity, Infinity, and Death.
 
Elizio33 said:
I have one question if we are not separating DeMatteis's take of the Marvel Cosmology from the main MC. DeMatteis has clearly a different view on DeMatteis clearly has a different view on Oblivion who is portrayed as the second most powerful force after God (the Void from which the Multiverse grew and to which it would return, and seeing the Multiverse as an illusion), unlike the main continuity's depiction of Oblivion which portrays him as equal to Eternity, Infinity, and Death.
Click to expand...
They can argue for it how they like. However, there are clear differences that warrant a split. They just don't want a “split” as opposed to a split that is illogical. They want a composite Cosmology for whatever reason, even if it's not the best approach.
 
VeryGoofyToddler said:
They can argue for it how they like. However, there are clear differences that warrant a split. They just don't want a “split” as opposed to a split that is illogical. They want a composite Cosmology for whatever reason, even if it's not the best approach.
Click to expand...
Yes. There are some elements from DeMatteis's take on the Marvel Cosmology that are outdated or just different
 
Also. I don't really believe in: "A manifestation of Oblivion is equal to Eternity, Infinity and Death, but his true form is way more powerful"

Oblivion is equal to them in the main continuity. With the G.O.D.S series, Oblivion might be on par with the Living Tribunal and is his counterpart, but that's because the hierarchy changed after the Eighth Cosmos, which implies that Oblivion is bound to the Multiverse in some ways since he is affected by its changes.
 
Just to be sure, is there any chance of Defenders Vol 3 and/or Doctor Strange Sorcerer Supreme #90 being kept in the main canon?
 
Elizio33 said:
Oblivion is equal to them in the main continuity. With the G.O.D.S series, Oblivion might be on par with the Living Tribunal and is his counterpart, but that's because the hierarchy changed after the Eighth Cosmos, which implies that Oblivion is bound to the Multiverse in some ways since he is affected by its changes.
Click to expand...
Unless Hickman uses Universe interchangeably with Multiverse. I do believe those gods beyond gods that we see were just their Universal embodiment as the story hinted at quite a few times.
 
Eseseso said:
I just saw you mentioned the Chthon stuff from that particular issue in the OP.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I find that specifically important due to the nature of things and the mental plane as “beyond those concepts” in the gross plane. The description really helps establish that the mental/metaphysical realms are much transcendent to the gross/material plane.
 
VeryGoofyToddler said:
Unless Hickman uses Universe interchangeably with Multiverse. I do believe those gods beyond gods that we see were just their Universal embodiment as the story hinted at quite a few times.
Click to expand...
I know but it doesn't change the fact that they are affected by the changes occurring in the Multiverse.
 
VeryGoofyToddler said:
Yeah, I find that specifically important due to the nature of things and the mental plane as “beyond those concepts” in the gross plane. The description really helps establish that the mental/metaphysical realms are much transcendent to the gross/material plane.
Click to expand...
So would you say yes or no to keeping that in the main canon.

(I won't lie I didn't know until now that that specific issue was a Demattis one but looking at how they describe Chthon it does not surprise me)
 
Elizio33 said:
Yes. Even the One Above All, who is God in the main continuity, is implied to have superiors or things outside his influences, contrary to DeMatteis' conception of God.
Click to expand...
Yup, not only that but the most recent issues of Incredible Hulk apparently show that One Above All casually switched to his alter ego due to being wrathful and angry. Which is the opposite of God, not only that but a 0 can't be emotionally attached, especially if the said “emotion” is/isn't identical to God’s nature ie Divine Simplicity, and Apophatic Theology.
 
VeryGoofyToddler said:
Yup, not only that but the most recent issues of Incredible Hulk apparently show that One Above All casually switched to his alter ego due to being wrathful and angry. Which is the opposite of God, not only that but a 0 can't be emotionally attached, especially if the said “emotion” is/isn't identical to God’s nature ie Divine Simplicity, and Apophatic Theology.
Click to expand...
Yes. The One Above All wasn't shown to be above Duality or Opposite. The One Below All, who represents hatred, destruction and darkness, is the opposite of the One Above All, who represents love, creation and light. Both are the same being but when it comes time to create, the One Above All all is there, while when it comes time to destroy, the One Above All becomes the One Below All.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Elizio33
An upgrade for The Presence
2
Replies
75
Views
8K
VeryGoofyToddler2
VeryGoofyToddler2
VeryGoofyToddler2
DC/Vertigo Cosmology Redo (Part 2 of 2)
3 4 5
Replies
183
Views
22K
VeryGoofyToddler2
VeryGoofyToddler2
Eseseso
  • Locked
1-A Upgrade for the Astral Plane and the Abstracts (Marvel Comics)
2
Replies
71
Views
7K
Eseseso
Eseseso
ProfectusInfinity
  • Locked
Miscellaneous Marvel Additions
Replies
22
Views
2K
ProfectusInfinity
ProfectusInfinity
VeryGoofyToddler2
  • Locked
J.M. DeMatteis Cosmology Revision
4 5 6
Replies
236
Views
26K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top