Pick & choose

[KC]

That's called denial in reality. Doesn't matter when it comes to fiction.

Same kind of thing. Both are being in denial of facts.

[byrd156]

Same kind of thing. Both are being in denial of facts.

No one is saying those facts aren't real. Superman is a fictional character that is owned by DC. Just that you can ignore story elements if you want. This doesn't hurt anyone or effect anyone else unlike your denial examples.

[KC]

Superman does not exist and has never existed. No biographical information about his life is factual: it is fictional. Fictions are not factual. We may tell ourselves stories about Superman that do not entirely match the details of the publication history of Superman. But these are simply two different stories. Neither one is a more correct story than the other. Stories are not factual, so you can't have a wrong story. By selectively choosing our canon, we are creating our own unique story. That is not wrong or delusional. It is an expression of our own storytelling.

There are narrative facts to Superman’s story (he was born on Krypton to Jor-El and Lara, he has blue eyes). The narrative facts about Superman are owned by DC Comics. Try selling one of your “equally correct” stories for money and you will see who owns the stories of Superman.

[KC]

No one is saying those facts aren't real. Superman is a fictional character that is owned by DC. Just that you can ignore story elements if you want. This doesn't hurt anyone or effect anyone else unlike your denial examples.

Facts are facts. You can ignore story points but doing so is childishly ignoring facts.

[byrd156]

I love this thread, I am having such a good time.

[KC]

Considering the state of DC's continuity, I wonder how any sane person would ever acknowledge the facts of its continuity. I doubt anyone truly knows, even those writing it. We are all so childish for not stringently accepting it.

It’s fairly easy actually.

[byrd156]

Facts are facts. You can ignore story points but doing so is childishly ignoring facts.

You're right, we are all children. What's so wrong with that?

[Pohzee]

There are narrative facts to Superman’s story (he was born on Krypton to Jor-El and Lara, he has blue eyes). The narrative facts about Superman are owned by DC Comics. Try selling one of your “equally correct” stores for money and you will see who owns the stories of Superman.

Elseword Superman stories like Red Son seem to sell well enough despite not fitting into the official DC cannon of Superman. Don't be dense. What sells has the DC logo on it because they own the legal branding of the characters. For public domain properties, we have seen different studios produce movies based on the same story in the same year. Neither one is wrong. Are you arguing that US copyright law makes a story true? That is an awful way to define that. Laws do not necessarily align with truth or reality. Laws can be rewritten or reinterpreted.

Who is the author of the story of Superman? Not his creators, his story goes beyond them. Not Bendis. Not a single editor either. Is AT&T the author? How would a non-sentient entity determine what is true. You can pretend like your viewpoint is objective and true, but for a medium like serialized comics of multiple authors, it falls flat on its face. Editors make mistakes and direct contradictions happen. Sometimes a character's eye color changes due to coloring error. What implication does this have? If two stories directly contradict one another with no plausible crisis or continuity change to handwave it away, how do you resolve this?

There is no one true story of Superman. We all create our own story of Superman based on what we read and how we chose to interpret it.

[KC]

You're right, we are all children. What's so wrong with that?

Except for the obvious that you are presumably an adult. And if you really didn’t have a problem with being called childish, this thread would be a lot shorter than it currently is.

[byrd156]

Except for the obvious that you are presumably an adult. And if you really didn’t have a problem with being called childish, this thread would be a lot shorter than it currently is.

This didn't start with me, I'm just along for the ride. Also you never answered the question.

[KC]

This didn't start with me, I'm just along for the ride. Also you never answered the question.

You replied to my comment at the start of this. And my first sentence answers your question.

[byrd156]

You replied to my comment at the start of this. And my first sentence answers your question.

You and Bored got more into it. I was just pointing out how the childish part doesn't make sense in reference to superheroes. Which were created to entertain children but whatever.

[Bored at 3:00AM]

I think we'll just have to agree that we do not have the same approach to fiction. You view it as product only, to be controlled, monetized and defined solely by whichever corporate entity happens to own it at the moment. I view it as something more.

How you define the fictional construct of the DCU is perfectly valid. If you really want to cede so much control of your imagination to corporate bean counters rather than yourself, you are perfectly within your rights to do so. However, to call people childish because they do not share that view is rude and an insult.

If you don't want to acknowledge that or being insulting and rude doesn't matter to you, you've told us a lot about yourself. As a result, I am not interested in conversing with you any further. I'm sorry we couldn't get each other to understand each other better.

Have fun with this thread, guys.

[Dred]

It’s fairly easy actually.

Tell me everything that is canon about Superman right now.

Because I can't tell you and I'm reading it. And I know you can't tell me. Because they tossed together a giant mish mash splash page and it frequently contradicts its self and the continuity around it. You'd like to think it just blanket made post crisis canon, but it clearly ignored giant swathes of Superman's history to do so because he is unfamiliar with certain things and characters. Some of the New 52 stuff happened because now the entire JL, who are still primarily New 52 versions of themselves, act like they've always known him but we know obvious things like his relationship with Wonder Woman is not canon.

Even Didio, your patron saint, has talked about how focusing on canon isn't important. His favorite phrase is story over continuity, after all, even if his choice of stories is certainly not mine. He has outright said "only the best stories are canon." This is the man in charge of the comic line. And while he might think of HiC as the best story, what is the best story is personally dependent.

[KC]

Elseword Superman stories like Red Son seem to sell well enough despite not fitting into the official DC cannon of Superman. Don't be dense. What sells has the DC logo on it because they own the legal branding of the characters. For public domain properties, we have seen different studios produce movies based on the same story in the same year. Neither one is wrong. Are you arguing that US copyright law makes a story true? That is an awful way to define that. Laws do not necessarily align with truth or reality. Laws can be rewritten or reinterpreted.

Who is the author of the story of Superman? Not his creators, his story goes beyond them. Not Bendis. Not a single editor either. Is AT&T the author? How would a non-sentient entity determine what is true. You can pretend like your viewpoint is objective and true, but for a medium like serialized comics of multiple authors, it falls flat on its face. Editors make mistakes and direct contradictions happen. Sometimes a character's eye color changes due to coloring error. What implication does this have? If two stories directly contradict one another with no plausible crisis or continuity change to handwave it away, how do you resolve this?

There is no one true story of Superman. We all create our own story of Superman based on what we read and how we chose to interpret it.

Elseworld stories are still published by DC. Movie studios are given permission to use DC's property. And yes, copyright law and ownership laws determine who owns what.

Yes, AT&T owns Superman and DC. DC hires writers to tell stories about their characters and the stories that are written are owned by DC and up the chain AT&T. Continuity remains blurry until DC cleans it up and if they never clean it up, it is always blurry.

There is one true story for Superman the one that AT&T delegates to DC which delegates to its staff and workers to tell.