Dave Galanter
December 1st 1969 - December 12th 2020
He was loved.

Comic Battle >> View Post
·
Post By
would be watcher

In Reply To
Daveym

Subj: So be it... lets disagree NT
Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 at 03:12:03 pm EST
Reply Subj: Re: And the answer to my question is ?
Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 at 02:51:39 pm EST

Previous Post

> > > >
> > > > Feel Free to try shooting, I'm ready \:\-\*
> > >
> > > You are side stepping the issue so I'll shoot really straight for you. Answer CLEARLY this question: Do you think all scans of old have the same fact value that the new one does?
> > >
> > To my mind i've addressed every one of your points!
> >
>
> Honestly you have side stepped many questions the same way you just did below...
>
> > Someone posts a scan with Thor fishing for the Midgard Serpent and it got discussed and put into it's context...
> > Someone posts a scan of Thor in the Sun and it gets discussed and rationalised.... both are extreme examples of a character who lives in an impossible world and experiences unearthly things. No problem for me.
> >
>
> Stop isolating examples and please concentrate on the big picture for a moment. You try to marginalise the examples I gave but seamingly fail to realise that you are giving me credit when you need to put thing into context... It's been many reply by now that I've been talking about context that has changed and how it does affect the characters in a scan feat context. I have no problem with thor or hulk doing thing like those above in an impossible world. My problem is when they are used in today's context... with scans from those impossible moments... that are no more. Even you realise that, but somehow refuse to acknowledge it!
>
"...That are no more"? What, did that Midgard Serpent event not happen now?
As far as i'm concerned it's all in-continuity, no matter how improboble it seems. If one writer shows Thor fishing for the Serpent then yeah - it's a far out picture! But then if another much later has Thor fighting an improboble and final battle with the serpent on earth you have some corroboration of that earlier feat...
>
> > So to answer your question if someone posts a scan of Odin transporting the Human race to Limbo temporarily it is put into it's context as being early 60s and given what we know of the Odinpower i'd say it's perfectly plausible he could do such a thing in the modern age. All of this was part of Mike Oemings Ragnarok storyline explaining why the Asgardians and Odin were getting weaker, or am I getting that wrong !!! ?
>
>
> My question was not: Do I beleive it's plausible for Odin to do this or that in context X or Y. My question was: Do you think all scans of old have the same fact value that the new one does? I'll help you for your next answer... you must say yes, no, or maybe and preferably say why you answer this. Not answer by a detour example that does not tackle the essense of the question. I don't care what char X or Y can plausibly do. I just want to know if, IYO, old feats hold as much water as the one of today's. You can rationalize all you want but when the scans are shown people do not present them saying: keep in mind they are from an impossible reality so... No they say thor is in the sun , therefore he can be in the sun today without any problem. And this is where I choke and where I say that things might have CHANGED... specialy when less old document exist to hint otherwise.
>
Well i've no idea what you expect from me... neither do i care really.
So far as i'm concerned it's all in continuity with Marvel. That'll do for me.
You want something from me... an admission? To hammer my view into your view? Obviously my views & criteria are a world apart from yours so it's never going to happen, this stuff might be keeping you awake at night but it's of no interest to me! I'm out of Gas on this topic.

>
> > It's like the Hulk being able to see ghosts, an inexplicable and fairly obscure ability that was seldom seen but a valid part of his history and eventually explained in the Peter David run.
> > Thor had the time travel ability of his hammer deliberatly removed as i recall too.
> > So these are all the same characters with the same history and that's good enough for me. Some have grown stronger over the decades some have fluctuated but it is reasonably explained within the context of linear stortelling and natural evolution of character.
> > No one says '1960s Sue Storm vs. 1990s Thing' after all....
> >
> What is funny is that we have many common dialogue when all is said but we still don't see eye to eye. I think down the road you have put to much importance on individual changes and forgot about the validity of old stuff vs new stuff... which was my primary concern.

I can't put it any clearer. Fashion changes, printing technology changes, Artistic style changes or evolves - but these are still the same characters as they were 40 years ago.

A writer might decide to make Thor a frog for a couple of issues, or give the Hulk Banners brain but it's still the same cohesive history....

> > > > >
> > > > > Feel Free to try shooting, I'm ready \:\-\*
> > > >
> > > > You are side stepping the issue so I'll shoot really straight for you. Answer CLEARLY this question: Do you think all scans of old have the same fact value that the new one does?
> > > >
> > > To my mind i've addressed every one of your points!
> > >
> >
> > Honestly you have side stepped many questions the same way you just did below...
> >
> > > Someone posts a scan with Thor fishing for the Midgard Serpent and it got discussed and put into it's context...
> > > Someone posts a scan of Thor in the Sun and it gets discussed and rationalised.... both are extreme examples of a character who lives in an impossible world and experiences unearthly things. No problem for me.
> > >
> >
> > Stop isolating examples and please concentrate on the big picture for a moment. You try to marginalise the examples I gave but seamingly fail to realise that you are giving me credit when you need to put thing into context... It's been many reply by now that I've been talking about context that has changed and how it does affect the characters in a scan feat context. I have no problem with thor or hulk doing thing like those above in an impossible world. My problem is when they are used in today's context... with scans from those impossible moments... that are no more. Even you realise that, but somehow refuse to acknowledge it!
> >
> "...That are no more"? What, did that Midgard Serpent event not happen now?
> As far as i'm concerned it's all in-continuity, no matter how improboble it seems. If one writer shows Thor fishing for the Serpent then yeah - it's a far out picture! But then if another much later has Thor fighting an improboble and final battle with the serpent on earth you have some corroboration of that earlier feat...
> >
> > > So to answer your question if someone posts a scan of Odin transporting the Human race to Limbo temporarily it is put into it's context as being early 60s and given what we know of the Odinpower i'd say it's perfectly plausible he could do such a thing in the modern age. All of this was part of Mike Oemings Ragnarok storyline explaining why the Asgardians and Odin were getting weaker, or am I getting that wrong !!! ?
> >
> >
> > My question was not: Do I beleive it's plausible for Odin to do this or that in context X or Y. My question was: Do you think all scans of old have the same fact value that the new one does? I'll help you for your next answer... you must say yes, no, or maybe and preferably say why you answer this. Not answer by a detour example that does not tackle the essense of the question. I don't care what char X or Y can plausibly do. I just want to know if, IYO, old feats hold as much water as the one of today's. You can rationalize all you want but when the scans are shown people do not present them saying: keep in mind they are from an impossible reality so... No they say thor is in the sun , therefore he can be in the sun today without any problem. And this is where I choke and where I say that things might have CHANGED... specialy when less old document exist to hint otherwise.
> >
> Well i've no idea what you expect from me... neither do i care really.
> So far as i'm concerned it's all in continuity with Marvel. That'll do for me.
> You want something from me... an admission? To hammer my view into your view? Obviously my views & criteria are a world apart from yours so it's never going to happen, this stuff might be keeping you awake at night but it's of no interest to me! I'm out of Gas on this topic.
>
> >
> > > It's like the Hulk being able to see ghosts, an inexplicable and fairly obscure ability that was seldom seen but a valid part of his history and eventually explained in the Peter David run.
> > > Thor had the time travel ability of his hammer deliberatly removed as i recall too.
> > > So these are all the same characters with the same history and that's good enough for me. Some have grown stronger over the decades some have fluctuated but it is reasonably explained within the context of linear stortelling and natural evolution of character.
> > > No one says '1960s Sue Storm vs. 1990s Thing' after all....
> > >
> > What is funny is that we have many common dialogue when all is said but we still don't see eye to eye. I think down the road you have put to much importance on individual changes and forgot about the validity of old stuff vs new stuff... which was my primary concern.
>
> I can't put it any clearer. Fashion changes, printing technology changes, Artistic style changes or evolves - but these are still the same characters as they were 40 years ago.
>
> A writer might decide to make Thor a frog for a couple of issues, or give the Hulk Banners brain but it's still the same cohesive history....


Posted with Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2021 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2021 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2021 Powermad Software