Gosh, it’s a good thing we’re discussing something important!
–Cliffy
I realize I replied to Dex with an explanation when he said sometimes they weren’t necessary, and if that bothers anyone, I apologize. I do feel compelled to explain myself if I feel there’s a misunderstanding. For the record, I didn’t consider it a personal insult - it was intended as a mildly entertaining snark, but I recognize that it could be taken badly. So I apologize for the lack of forethought in that wording.
Lochdale - with regard to this debate - to debate it at all we must assume that these entities exist in an internally consistent cosmology. Our only window into that cosmology is that which is provided through the comics we read. In regard to Superman’s Invulnerability vs. Mjolnir, we have one piece of direct evidence - JLA/Avengers. In that, Superman stands up to a pounding very well - comparable to the way heavy hitters like the Hulk have withstood Thor’s attacks in the past. The inescapable conclusion is that Superman’s physique is exceptional in ways beyond his protective field. To argue otherwise contradicts the direct physical evidence we have - basically, to claim what you claim, we have to invalidate otherwise impeccable evidence - and in so doing, we cast doubt on ALL the evidence we have of that cosmology, rendering the debate less than meaningless.
To claim “Superman can’t withstand a strike by Mjolnir” then, is equivalent to saying “Superman can’t fly.” It would be different if we had contradictory pieces of direct evidence, at odds with one another.
Wait… didn’t Odin’s “worthy” enchantment kick in at that point, and wouldn’t THAT be the reason Superman was able to catch Mjolnir? After the fight, the enchantment kicked in again and Superman was unable to lift it.
Superman DID bleed when he was first struck by Mjolnir, I was actually re-reading the trade and there’s a blodod trail; I guess from his nose/mouth. Superman also bled when struck by Doomsday, who wasn’t a magical being…so I don’t know if it’s the magic of Mjolnir or the strength of Thor himself that at work.
We also have an important piece of circumstantial evidence regarding Superman’s abnormal physique. If you’ll recall, the other Avengers heavy hitters gather on Superman and bash him after Thor is taken down.
Hercules, among them.
Hercules is shown wielding a weapon that appears identical to the enchanted adamant mace he had used in the past, which had withstood strikes by Mjolnir. It’s possible that this was a lookalike, which is what makes this circumstantial - however, it must be, in any case, a weapon strong enough to withstand the usual forces produced by its wielder, who is quite a strong fellow, as he bashes things.
The weapon is shown breaking as Hercules uses it to pound on Superman.
Which they don’t. At all. Superman can sometimes withstand repeated pounding from magic items and fists about as well as he could face comprable mundane forces (as with Thor). More often, his protection is decreased, but still very significant (as against Captain Marvel’s lightning in Kingdom Come). And sometimes, magic stuff goes through him like a hot knife through butter (vampire fangs, on several occasions). Lochdale’s opinion of what Mjolnir should do to Superman is perfectly supported by some material and perfectly contradicted by others.
Even comics professionals don’t agree to the nature and extent of Superman’s vulnerability to magic. Your “forcefield + inherent constitution” model is a valiant attempt to reconcile all the contradictory infornmation, but it still remains pure speculation.
I’ve given my opinion on what Superman’s vulnerability should be, but I make no claims that it’s the official stance. There is no official stance! Or if there is one, it’ll change the next time Superman faces a magic opponent (next round: Superman/Shazam!: Stolen Thunder).
Anyway, in regards to the tiara, maybe it was just really sharp and unbreakable and hurled with the “strength of the earth” and thus able to cut Superman anyway, magic or no.
CandidGamera said it was a slow week.
Which is true. Nothing that I’m reading came out this week. But last week I got the fifth and final Promethea collection, and oh…my…goddess, that’s one of the most stunning things I’ve ever read.
We don’t know how strong the weapon is, as we don’t know which mace it is and never seem him use that mace before he hits Superman with it. It may have broken if he hit the She-Hulk with it; we don’t know. I submit the fact that it does break tells us more about the quality of the object than it does Superman’s physique.
As you said noted previous maces withstood strikes by Mjolnir, which itself didn’t chip or break when it struck Superman…therefor I submit the mace used to strike Superman was a fake and an inferior one at that.
If we don’t assume a self-consistent cosmology, we might as well shrug our shoulders at any “factual” assessment of comic events. “Superman can’t fly.” Shrug “Batman’s a paraplegic.” Shrug To make it worthwhile to debate, we have to believe what we see.
That explanation is, as I understand it, consistent with all presentations of Superman’s interactions with magic. There may be an alternative explanation that also meets all criteria, but I haven’t heard it yet.
I will note, though, that if my explanation is true, the information is not contradictory. That’s the point. It’s like the scientific method. You come up with a hypothesis that fits the observations and “tests”.
Again, it’s just circumstantial evidence. It makes no sense to me that Hercules would use a weapon that would routinely break in his hands, but perhaps you feel differently.
Routinely? Superman isn’t a frost giant, or a lesser god or meta-human. Hercules “back up” mace, may well be perfectly suited to smashing buildings or the usual “routine” things a God has to deal with, but STILL not be able to withstand a direct blow against a unique weapons Mjolnir or repeated blows against the unique Superman…things which Hercules, who isn’t the brightest bulb wouldn’t expect to deal with anyway.
Or, we can admit that some aspect of continuity are more consistant, clear-cut, and agreed upon than others. It’s fiction. Even when most things are consistant and make sense, there will be occasional blind spots. I submit that Superman’s vulnerability to magic is paticularly troublesome.
Sure. Different writers have different opinions on how Superman’s invulnerability interacts with magic weapons and strength. No one writer (or editor) has been able to convert or squash the other contradictory opinions. Getting a definitive answer is always problematic, since magic weapons usually hit very hard, which Post-Crisis is enough to make Superman notice anyway, and it’s something of a minor issue, in teh big picture.
That’s a handwave. That explanation must be the last resort for all perceived problems, lest it become the first resort for all perceived problems.
That invulnerability though is based solely on the premise that Mjolnir does not constitute a magical attack. If Mjolnir is a magical attack then Superman is in serious trouble. That is, if Thor can hurt him as badly as he did in the crossover can you imagine what he would have done to him if Superman’s personal shield was obviated by the hammer? Several comics have suggested that Mjolnir should have been considered a magial attack. Wonder Woman’s tiara is the most recent of these. Superman was hurt not just because Wonder Woman is strong but because she used a magical weapon which obviated his shields. That’s a crucial distinction.
To be sure, getting punched from a magical character (one who was created by magical means or draws from a magical power source) does not seem to be enough to obviate Superman’s shields but getting struck by a magical weapon certainly does. I submit that Mjolnir is such a magical weapon and thus, a future fight between Superman and Thor may have a radically different result.
Comic books are all about speculation and debating. That’s half the fun.
Problems with this argument :
In established continuity, Mjolnir beat on Superman repeatedly, and the results, while assuredly painful for Superman, were far less than devastating. So if we do not accept the enhanced physique theory (which has a lot of other data points to recommend it, including Superman’s ability to withstand the Lightning of Shazam), we must assume Mjolnir isn’t magical in the proper way to hurt Superman, as Busiek asserts according to your claims. You think Busiek is wrong. Busiek’s one of the top writers around today, and respects continuity. That’s not conclusive, but it works against you.
Secondly - let’s use the tiara example. Even it didn’t cut Superman deeply. Enough to bleed, certainly. Didn’t hit the artery. He seemed to be breathing okay, despite the cut. Seems to have been a pretty shallow cut - consistent with the durable musculature theory - or we can chalk it up to Diana’s accuracy. What is doesn’t give us is ANY evidence about the properties of Mjolnir.
If Superman were an ordinary mortal with regard to magical effects, the lightning of Shazam should cripple him in one go. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that this is not the case - first and foremost in Kingdom Come, a miniseries written by a man acknowledged by his peers as one of the single most knowledgeable persons in the world with regard to DC comics continuity, Mark Waid.
Well the crossover is not continuity in the DCU. Moreover (as you note), while I respect Busiek as a writer and I respect his point of view, a number of other writers and fans disagree with him. It would have changed the fight dramatically if the hammer was considered a magical attack by Busiek.
Superman is rarely cut unless attacked by a monsterous foe or a magical weapon. The tiara has been used before to decapitate a god but only after Diana put a massive amout of effort into it. The cut suggests that the magical nature of the weapon obviated Superman’s personal shield and then cut him. This is consistent with Dracula being able to pierce his skin or the sword in Kingdom Come cutting him just by his touching it. Normal needles, swords etc. rarely hurt Superman and in fact tend to break around him. WW’s tiara is no more magical than Thor and is fact rather similar to Mjolnir in origins.
He was hit with 3 shots of the lightning in Kingdom Come and he was badly damaged by it. Do note that the Superman in Kingdom Come was more powerful than normal given that he had been absorbing solar radiation for 10+ years and was not using his powers. He was still nearly levelled by it. Would 3 normal lightning bolts have done that? Unlikely. Again, it goes to the magical attack getting past his shields.
So it’s ok for you to quote Mark Waid but when I mention Dan Jurgens who has written more than 100 issues of Superman you dismiss him as crazy? You can’t have it both ways.
Not in continuity in the MU, sorry.
It’s out already? I’m way behind, but I’ll catch up eventually. How did they handle the last issue – just printed it normally?
–Cliffy
[QUOTE=Cliffy]
It’s out already? I’m way behind, but I’ll catch up eventually. How did they handle the last issue – just printed it normally?
The pages are printed in the same order as in the original comic, but all right side up. There is a double-sided poster included in the book that shows what the pages look like assembled into the two images of Promethea, but much reduced in size.
I never considered rabid fanboy an insult. What’s good for the goose…
I never considered rabid fanboy an insult. What’s good for the goose…