Spoiler
Show
stories must be repeated, that's what they do. Everything, even us right now, we are all stories. Your life, it's unprovable. You remember the narrative and you can imagine clearly the visuals but it's a story, the Anthem of Aquila Dei. We are all just another skald's dream in the shadows.
Consider that stories in comics repeat because the medium requires it. I may read batman stories years after thanqol does, but we both read the same batman. He is archetypal, and this is reflected in his stories. Further, the stories are reflected in him; because of who and what he is, his stories will always be the same. Isn't that how 'predestination' and 'free will' coexist? Prediction, not scripting. Batman will always perform the actions that a batman would perform. If baan performed the actions of Larry instead, he wouldn't be batman because batman doesn't perform like a larry, doesn't express the Larry attributes.
The stories have to repeat because they must define and redefine the archetype for those who missed it. The continuity, the trappings of time passing, these are nods to the old fans because yes, they've seen it before. But they are superficial.
Stories are memetic, but I dislike leaving it their. Words ate hints and snippets, not traps. I disliking defining something aims to contain it, which is why I dislike superficial science fiction; which is why I dislike superficial science. Science in the common man's understanding is to catalogue and move on, after having sagely contained motion and acceleration and heat and energy under "physics". The common man will use this as a dismissive. "oh, that's physics." he will say, with a hand wave and a segue elsewhere because physics is known, encapsulated, let's move on. Or an argument will go "it's been peoven scientifically" which belies reproach about what scientist where and how did such a thing. Science is undeniable, and wielded as an end.
Magic even moreso, because where science at least makes a nod to processes, magic is magic and ain't gotta explain **** (which is what science does, specifically in regards to metabolism and the gastrointestinal processes of the bowels). Magician something that seemingly can't be argued with.
This is false however; this is a man seeing Magic! And giving it the same clothes as Science! And then complaining because at least science has the decent to tip its hat and doesn't need an extra notch in its belt! But that's approaching magic like science (you have hopefully caught on that I'm using these as proper nouns now; science, from it's root, means knowledge; Scientology is a beautiful word with enormous promise shackled to a pre-existing idea that doesn't gel). You don't approach cooking like cleaning, why should this differ?
Magic, IF we compare Science to a museum or library where everything is shutdown and locked up and filed away for ease of digestion, is the exact opposite as a device. Magic is the funny book dropped outside a used book store, with the food ajar. And a funny statue on one of the shelves... And a sign in an odd language... Then a flight of stairs with a light on down there, and some voices.... Then an odd, formal ball of about ten people who pay you no mind... Then a large door with a lion knocker... Then an accountant at a desk asking if you're here for deposit or withdrawal.
At any one of these points, you can stop and look around and apply rationality and get a lot of nice data. The bookstore is closed, so return the book, maybe jot a note, close the door. Or the statue is neat, these books are interesting, let's have a read. Or these stairs lead to a stock room,they must be busy, let's go. Or this ball must be for a book club, may e they didn't know they left the door open, perhaps the staff party wouldn't mind the distraction of a party crasher? But each step of the way,magic in literature or in principle draws you in further, says 'but why stop here? There's more!'
Magic In stories involves invocation without real knowledge, but instead trust in verisimilitude. You cross the bridge because you've told the troll that your brother will be along shortly. That family looks after family, preventing you from selling your brother out when he has no money or your brother from not seeing after you debt, is magic. You could always go deeper, but that just leads to a different point at which the same rules apply. Magic at its heart is wonder, mystery, in which each discovery leads to no answers and more questions. The dissection of magic ruins it.
Superman is magic. No amount of explanation adequately explains how he can fly or survive bullets. But it goes further. Supes doesn't have magic, he is magic. He is a force which occurs to other people. That scene from the recent movie where he takes a bullet to the eye isn't about how awesome Superman is, it's about the wonder of being a good guy, a hostage, and being in a bad spot. And then this magical man of steel flies in, rights the wrongs, and defies all expectations by ignoring the known (bullets kill; good is dumb; numbers matter) and creates mystery. That Lois Lane takes him for granted is a travesty. She has taken invincibility, a passion for justice, the dichotomy of never being art of that thing you love but still upholding it, sacrifice and success beyond sacrifice, eye lasers and flight and the ability to somehow shrug off supersonic force while still being sensitive enough to moderate your movements to not crush others into paste, all these wonderful beautiful terrifying things! She calls all this 'superman' and invokes him without thought. Superman is as much about a city calling on magic it doesn't understand, as it is about that magic's feelings on the subject. The entire set up is for believability and empathy, because "bad guts do bad stuff and then a savior appears, makes it all better and fills you with a sense of joy and awesomeness before leaving" doesn't work.
That's why the justification. That batman is a 40 year old super ninja scientist vigilante is unimportant; it's the handwave so you stop going "wait, what?" and go "yeah batman, kick his ass!". Spider man climbs walls. How? Spider powers. Let's move on. This is where science is often employed. If something is science enough, you accept it and move on.
That's the point; why batman is fighting criminals instead of having a PTSD attack is irrelevant unless the questionhds up the narrative. Batman is Justice, Good winning No Matter What, Darkness Without Malice; the rough man willing to do violence on your behalf, for the Right Reasons. He must be Good, Capable, Right. These three allow for the proper stories. If you challenge the assumptions (and you can, because these are great stories in themselves) then you're no longer listening to the tale of Batman and how man can mean well but must be ever vigilant against the darkness of his own heart, but can redeem himself through good works. You are listening instead to subjective versus objective morality, philosophy, and who has the right to decide one way or another, and the consequences of those questions. Certainly interesting, but no longer batman.
To which one could easily argue "but that is what batman is all about!". Yes, true, on that level. But superheroes are magic, and beckon. One can always go deeper.
Such is art. The hardest part about watching thanqol's triumph has been the assumption that there is Art and I'm not doing it right. But where I get off and enjoy myself, while he continues his sometimes painful, sometimes beautiful elevator ride, is choice, not objectively good or bad. On one end of the spectrum we can say "art is subjective so you can't judge me" and on the other we can say "you did not perfectly capture, catalogue and detail the thing you drew, you fail". But the entire point of this, and of my rant here, and of watching this bold Australian, and of helping you, is that the scale is a lie, a tool. set it where you want it for this particular project but don't let it dominate you. Sure, the same stories are told over and over. How you tell them and what you emphasize is also important.
-
I tried to tie this back down so the whole thing made a circuit. It feels smarmy but alas. It his way we can't say it's not relevant, though we could call null on the whole thing. What is a wizard of not an elevator? At some point, you've got to say "this is nice and all, but my stop was three floors ago. Jog on."