“Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear. ”

“Errors of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it. ”

This textbook thing is ridiculous. We need to allow our students access to a whole spectrum of historical viewpoints. Glossing over the truth does no one any favors.

When we stop questioning with reason, we’re dead in the water.

Even if y’all are a bit weird.

From the two books I have read of A. Lee’s ( “Monster” and ” In the Company of Ogres”) I felt he did have some well established rules for each of those world’s. He defined very well what Ogres do and don’t do, how much pain they can take, etc… It takes some defining of these things to build the stage, so to speak for us to sit back and enjoy the story.

At least, that’s my thinking. ITCoO was a tremendous story and was able to build a semi-defined world that I thought made it easier to suspend disbelief.

Anyway, Good work regardless.

T Sandoval

I think I understand why A. Lee decided not to define any substantial rules in any of his books. Rules, metaphysical or not, seem to destroy our suspension of disbelief (?) and the overall plot.

This has been brought forth by another of my favorite writers, Terry Goodkind, in his series “Sword of Truth” where the main character there eventually splits his magic universe, creating a separate non-magic universe.

Ultimately, this would indicate that there are parallel magic universes having different kinds of magic, ie… the Olde Gods and Monsters ‘magic’ and the ‘superhero’ magic, and others.

I dunno, the notion struck me and I went with it. flow of thought kinda thing.

T Sandoval

Recently in Marvel, they’ve had a Superman analog called the Sentry. They even rewrote the history books to fit him in. However, he’s very, very flawed (as is the Marvel way) and has multiple personality issues (he’s his own arch nemesis) and a failing marriage to a terrified woman. In an issue last month, she gave a testimonial on how her husband was really a junkie looking for a high when he found the serum that turned him into the Sentry. That he tried to use his superpowers as he thought he should (because of the example of other supers) but he couldn’t cut it. She makes a comment about how it takes a certain amount of character to be the good-guy, that not everyone can pull it off. Basically, that not everyone can be Captain America, because it’s not just about the powers or abilities. I wish I could condense it right now, or even remember which issue it was (Dark Avengers, I beielive) because it was a really good monologue on being a hero.

Then again, when the universe doesn’t push powers on the guys like Bruce Wayne or Captain America, you end up with guys like Monster. Which is a whole different kind of interesting to me.

But now you have me wondering, what causes superhero-ness in this magical universe? And what causes the chosen few to be fated? Because if the comic universe itself is magic, then any random person in that universe could potentially be magic. I mean, do comic universe people become “magical” because a great wrong has been done to them? Or what?

Even if your assessment were true, it wouldn’t change the fact that Batman is superhuman in his skills and accomplishments. That’s what makes Batman magic.

If Batman is crazy then I guess Green Arrow is just plain insane because he’s basically just a guy with a bow and arrow who fights crime. He doesn’t even have the elaborate backstory to explain it.

You are welcome!

Take no offense to this: Batman is not magic. Batman is Bruce Wayne’s defense mechanism caused by post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from childhood run in with the death of his parents and his own near death. Batman is crazy not magic.

p.s. Please don’t smite me.