TF Views

BWprowl wrote:

Gomess wrote:Sparky, do you get the concept that "meaninglessness" is, in itself, a *point*? An interpretation? I think that might be what you're missing here.

I think what happened was that Dom said ‘Final Crisis was about things having no meaning’, which Sparky somehow interpreted as him saying ‘Final Crisis had no meaning’ which is in fact pretty much the *opposite* of what Dom said.

Dom had asked why he should care about these books when Final Crisis was (supposedly) about nothing having meaning. I argued that someone like Dom should find plenty of meaning in Final Crisis. Then it somehow it became this silly back and forth where no one seems to understand what the argument is even about anymore. And yes Gomess, I know the concept of 'meaninglessness' can be in itself a point, but that's not exactly what Dom was saying.

Sparky Prime wrote:

BWprowl wrote:

Gomess wrote:Sparky, do you get the concept that "meaninglessness" is, in itself, a *point*? An interpretation? I think that might be what you're missing here.

I think what happened was that Dom said ‘Final Crisis was about things having no meaning’, which Sparky somehow interpreted as him saying ‘Final Crisis had no meaning’ which is in fact pretty much the *opposite* of what Dom said.

Dom had asked why he should care about these books when Final Crisis was (supposedly) about nothing having meaning. I argued that someone like Dom should find plenty of meaning in Final Crisis. Then it somehow it became this silly back and forth where no one seems to understand what the argument is even about anymore. And yes Gomess, I know the concept of 'meaninglessness' can be in itself a point, but that's not exactly what Dom was saying.

Holy crap, how did you manage to repeat the point, then completely miss it a sentence later? "Dom said Final Crisis was about nothing having meaning," then "Someone like Dom should find plenty of meaning in Final Crisis".

He DID find meaning in it: The meaning was that a bunch of other stuff that *wasn't* Final Crisis had no meaning! That is what Final Crisis is about! That is the meaning he found in it!

BWprowl wrote:Holy crap, how did you manage to repeat the point, then completely miss it a sentence later? "Dom said Final Crisis was about nothing having meaning," then "Someone like Dom should find plenty of meaning in Final Crisis".

He DID find meaning in it: The meaning was that a bunch of other stuff that *wasn't* Final Crisis had no meaning! That is what Final Crisis is about! That is the meaning he found in it!

And that's the sort of misunderstanding I'm talking about. You're taking it out of context, misrepresenting what I'm saying there. And this has dragged on long enough hasn't it?

Surely Dom is best disposed to say whether or not I understood what he was saying...

Seems like the kind of conversation that'd be better expressed through diagrams or something. I think the internet kills 15% of any dialogue.

Sparky Prime wrote:

BWprowl wrote:Holy crap, how did you manage to repeat the point, then completely miss it a sentence later? "Dom said Final Crisis was about nothing having meaning," then "Someone like Dom should find plenty of meaning in Final Crisis".

He DID find meaning in it: The meaning was that a bunch of other stuff that *wasn't* Final Crisis had no meaning! That is what Final Crisis is about! That is the meaning he found in it!

And that's the sort of misunderstanding I'm talking about. You're taking it out of context, misrepresenting what I'm saying there. And this has dragged on long enough hasn't it?

Maybe I am misinterpreting something, because all I keep seeing is you arguing that Dom said ‘Final Crisis had no meaning’ when you also keep quoting the part where he says what he thought the meaning of Final Crisis was.

But anyway, you’re right, this has gone on long enough and we shouldn’t be arguing about it; really we should’ve just been discussing what we thought Final Crisis did mean, since we all agreed that it had meaning of *some* sort.

We should go find an article where Morrison talks about it.

but that the point of the comic was that a lot of what came before it hadn't really mattered, and that the stories moving forward needed to be stripped of their 'meaning' if they were to have an impact on the DC Universe/structure.

It think it was more a question of Morrison saying that the old stories themselves had no meaning, but not only relative to DC. (It was a story about story, not a story about story as relative to DC.) Morrison himself, (in an interview I do not feel like hunting down at the moment), put specific emphasis on endings. Note how the last two issues were structured to emphasis the endings of the various arcs, albeit asynchroniously, consistent with both the "emphasis on endings" and the idea that time/narrative structure was coming undone.

(Of course, one could credibly argue that Morrison is a deconstructionist, (and he is not above "working" an audience), so I and other readers may well be chasing phantoms while drinking snake-oil.) But, there is enough evidence to say that the point of "Final Crisis was to show a lack of meaning".

truth wrote:

Come on, dude. You'll have to do better than that,

bada bing

Dom had asked why he should care about these books when Final Crisis was (supposedly) about nothing having meaning. I argued that someone like Dom should find plenty of meaning in Final Crisis.

"Final Crisis" was published by DC. When they publish a big event book with the premise that nothing means anything, why the hell should I care about what they have to write after that?

And, yes, I was saying that the point of FC was meaninglessness.

That is what Final Crisis is about! That is the meaning he found in it!

More like "the meaning that I am assuming (based on evidence) the Morrison put in".

We should go find an article where Morrison talks about it.

Nah. Feeling lazy. You do it.

Ultimately I've got to whittle my monthly comics back down to five or six comics so I'm not spending too much on them. I've been trying more than my usual share of DC's output, and even some of Marvel's, so we'll see what sticks around in the long run.

Yeah, I need to scale back a bit more as well. I am going to kick off '12 with 7 titles.
-New Avengers
-Moon Knight
-Ultimate Spiderman
-GI Joe: Cobra
-TF ongoing a
-TF ongoing b
-TF Furman


Dom
-not even going to the comic shop every week anymore.

Nah, we should argue about what song Superman sang into the Miracle Machine to stop Darkseid. I'm gonna say it was the "Numa Numa" song. Or maybe Tenacious D's "Tribute".

138 Scourge wrote:Nah, we should argue about what song Superman sang into the Miracle Machine to stop Darkseid. I'm gonna say it was the "Numa Numa" song. Or maybe Tenacious D's "Tribute".

Or the song *from* Tribute.

I just naturally assumed he sang the 60's Batman theme.

BWprowl wrote:Maybe I am misinterpreting something, because all I keep seeing is you arguing that Dom said ‘Final Crisis had no meaning’ when you also keep quoting the part where he says what he thought the meaning of Final Crisis was.

No, I've been arguing against Dom saying 'why should I care about these books when they published a story where nothing means anything'. I don't believe that to be an accurate view of the meaning behind Final Crisis, and subsequent books for that matter.