Top 25 Villains
Henri Fortuin
1.Lex Luther
2.Darkseid
3.Magneto
4.Joker
5.Venom
6.Carnage
7.Doctor Doom
8.Catwoman
9.Galactus
10.Reverse-Flash
Totsiens,
the ALFster
=================
| Henri Fortuin,| <<< Human speech is like a cracked kettle on which >>>
| Cape Town, | <<< we tap crude rhythms for bears to dance to, >>>
| South Africa | <<< while we long to make music that will melt the >>>
================= <<< stars. -- GUSTAVE FLAUBERT , Madame Bovary (1857)
RICH JOHNSTON
I'll try for 25
Here's mine: Picture a big smiley over everything. No Flames!
1: Jim Shooter (of course!)
2: Bob Harras (bbo! hiss!)
3: Steve Geppi (True Swamp! True Swamp!)
4: Dave Sim II
5: Steve Rosenberg (Give me Sunrise...)
6: Tom DeFalco
7: Todd McFarlane
8: Rob Liefeld
9: Doctor Octopus
10: Erik Larsen
11: Ben, fanboy from HELL!
12: Jim Shooter again, for the hell of it.
13: Chris and Steve from Forbidden Planet for not ordering Hepcats.
14: One of Todd McFarlane's other personas
15: Dave Thompson for not responding to my racma email posts.
16: Richard Davies for not giving me his Sandman hologram when I
asked him for it.
17: The guy who stole my Hulk 340.
18: The guy who gave me a free copy of the Spoof comics,
WildCHICKS and Youngspud. Oh, it was Richard Davies again.
19: PAD for not putting me in a comic yet.
20: Scott McMahan for liking Cyberforce.
21: My postman for folding a "Do Not Bend" envelope with a copy of
exit in it.
22: Neil Gaiman for not telling the Preston sci-fi group the ending to
Miracleman when I asked.
23: Alvaro for being Jim Shooter's Biggest fan.
24: Dave for being reasonable about Jim Shooter when he should
realise that Jim is the anti-Christ.
25: Galactus.
And that's all the weather.
..................................
RICH JOHNSTON- r.j.jo...@ncl.ac.uk
Creator of Dirtbag- should be out in August.
"Talk me some road!"- Chris Morris, The Day Today.
Mean Mister Mustard
Henri Fortuin <hfor...@stellbos.csir.co.za> wrote:
> Here are the top ten supervillains I can think of:
>
> 1.Lex Luther
> 2.Darkseid
> 3.Magneto
> 4.Joker
> 5.Venom
> 6.Carnage
> 7.Doctor Doom
> 8.Catwoman
> 9.Galactus
> 10.Reverse-Flash
>
Hmmm... I agree on Luthor, Darkseid, Magneto, Joker, Doc Doom, and Galactus
(though not necessarily in that order). I like Reverse-Flash a lot, too.
Catwoman? Good character, but not exactly a villain. And Venom and Carnage
just don't do anything for me -- I think Green Goblin is the ultimate Spider-
Man foe, and definitely a top ten villain! I'd put him there instead of
Carnage, definitely.
To replace Catwoman and Venom: The Red Skull, of course. Possibly the
Kingpin, but only after he became a real character in the pages of Daredevil.
If Ozymandias counted, he'd definitely be on there... of course, he doesn't
consider himself a villain... :)
Marc
michael kelly
hfor...@stellbos.csir.co.za (Henri Fortuin) writes:
|> Here are the top ten supervillains I can think of:
(I assume we are restricting ourselves to comics?)
|> 1.Lex Luther
Only if it is the Silver-Age (Earth-1) Luthor. The Golden
Age Luthor seemed to be more of just a mad scientist.
|> 2.Darkseid
|> 3.Magneto
No complaints here. They qualify by virtue of overexposure
if nothing else.
|> 4.Joker
Again, I'd restrict this to the 1980's Joker.
|> 5.Venom
|> 6.Carnage
No opinion on these losers, so I'd drop them.
|> 7.Doctor Doom
He deserves to be higher on the list.
|> 8.Catwoman
I don't think of her as a top 10 villainess. If you insist on
two Batman foes, the Riddler definitely is one of them.
|> 9.Galactus
Agreed.
|> 10.Reverse-Flash
Hmm...maybe.
I would add, in no particluar order: Dr. Sivana, Garth Ennis,
Brainiac (pre-Crisis), perhaps another X-foe from the Claremont
days, Anton Arcane, Dekko, I'm blanking on any others.
I can't think of a good candidate from the LSH. By definition
the Time Trapper can't qualify as a "top 25 villain of all
time", can he? I can't bring myself to feel threatened by either
Mordru or Glorith, and the LSV haven't caused any trouble since
three issue number 1s ago.
--
+ Mike Kelly, Notre Dame Department of Physics mke...@doc.helios.nd.edu +
+ +
+ Oh, and never mind the words, just hum along and keep on going. +
+ - Ian Anderson +
Michael A. Chary
My list would be:
1. Pulsar Stargrave (I love the name)
2. Lex Luthor
3. Dr. Doom
4. Magneto
5. Brainiac
6. Mordru
7. Time Trapper
8. Joker
9 The Scarecrow
10. Darkseid
11. Universo
12. Ultron
13. Kang the Conqueror
14. Dread Dormamu
15. Doctor Octopus
16 The Foreigner
17. Two-Face
18. Red Skull
19. Loki
20. Scorpion
21. Desire
22. Lucifer
23. The First of the Fallen
24. Terra-Man
25 Amazo
--
"Ipsa scientia potestas est."- Roger Bacon "To die for an idea is
to place a rather high price on conjecture." - Anatole France
"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation
with the average voter." - Winston Churchill
Braly Ronald F
>
>|> Here are the top ten supervillains I can think of:
>
>
>
>Agreed.
>
I think that Galactus is very misplaced by being on this list.
He's not a "villian". Sure he eats planets, but only because he hs to.
He is not motivated by evil intent, just self preservtion.
I think it is more accurate to say that he is an *antagonist* but not
a villian.
Ronnie Braly
rfb...@usl.edu
The Mystic Mongoose
> Here are the top ten supervillains I can think of:
>
> 2.Darkseid
> 3.Magneto
> 4.Joker
> 5.Venom
> 6.Carnage
> 7.Doctor Doom
> 8.Catwoman
> 9.Galactus
> 10.Reverse-Flash
>
Galactus as a bad guy? No. A foe, at times, but not really a villian.
1. Joker
A well-played Joker is the *best* villian ever.
2. Magneto
One of the better Marvel villians, even when he was a good guy.
3. Doctor Doom
The greatest megalomaniac of all time, and a visually *cool* guy.
4. Darkseid
One of the better cosmic villians.
5. Lex Luthor
He's been played weakly, up until just recently.
6. Master Darque
A newcomer, but a really enjoyable bad guy. Unfortunately, easy to
write poorly.
7. Kingpin
He's big, he's bad, he's powerful.
8. Doctor Octopus
Spidey's classic Villian
9. Two-Face
A innovative, visually dynamic character, with a nicely warped schtick.
10. Green Goblin/Hobgoblin/Demogoblin
Whatever you call him, whichever one he is, I like him.
11. The Red Skull
Classic Captain America Bad Guy.
12. Eclispo
13. Mojo
14. Venom
Back when he was a real bad guy.
15. Adolf Hitler's brain. (usually as the Hate-Monger.)
The bad guy in lots of Golden and Silver-age comics.
16. Sinestro
For the sake of this list, Emerald Toilet is considered an Elseworld.
17. Loki.
18. Brainiac
19. The Riddler
20. Mr Myzltplk... Mykzlplxk... You *know* who I'm talking about!
21. Ozymandias.
I still consider him the bad guy. And he got away with it.
22. The Mole Man
23. The Hooded One
Quickly becoming one of my faves. But is he a *super*-villian?
24. [Insert your favorite LSH villian here]
25. The Leader
Little known super-villians that are faves o' mine:
1. Null, the living darkness, from the Defenders/Squadron Supreme crossover,
Defenders.. ~110.
2. Queen Maraud (and not that <Slash> guy) from Power Pack. Well-played.
3. Starro. For no other reason than sentiment from CCAHAZC #1.
4. Starscream. Okay, on this group we've got Transformers readers.
5. The Heretic. Paul's greatest villian, even if Heretic III is a hoser. The
Silver Age Heretic was one of the bset villians ever, especially in Kirby's
hands.
And the list of best Villianesses:
1. Catwoman
2. Elektra
3. The White Queen
4. Ummm.... Well, those are the really memorable ones.
The Mystic Mongoose | ____________ |Contemplation is the
r...@gandalf.baylor.edu| / _______ |fornication of the mind.
Robert W. Armstrong | | ______ | -Gary Benson
P.O. Box 83641 | | _____ |And half of the 'net
Waco, TX 76798-3641 | \__ _____ |is impotent.
Jeffrey P Bakke
Thanos
Fillmore Coffers :-)
Green Goblin (original)
Paul (during his evil stage)
--
Eich been ein Noodle Noggen.
Welcome to the machine.
Braly Ronald F
>21. Ozymandias.
> I still consider him the bad guy. And he got away with it.
Which makes him one of the best villians of all time. He should be higher
up on the list IMO, especially considering he managed to put away Dr.
Manhatten.
>25. The Leader
>
Yes!! Anyone who disagrees (oh he's just some green guy with a big head),
just take a look at ground zero.
>
>The Mystic Mongoose | ____________ |Contemplation is the
>r...@gandalf.baylor.edu| / _______ |fornication of the mind.
>Robert W. Armstrong | | ______ | -Gary Benson
>P.O. Box 83641 | | _____ |And half of the 'net
>Waco, TX 76798-3641 | \__ _____ |is impotent.
Ronnie Braly
rfb...@usl.edu
allan b goodrich
The greatest LSH villain ever? Hmmmm.....Tom McCraw? Sorry folks! I
just really hate his "Outlaw Legion" story. Here's hoping that Zero Hour
will cancel out that story. Wait, that would make it even more confusing!
For real, I'd say that the Levitz Legion of Super-Villains was the best
group. True, there were some losers but Nemesis Kid was truly evil. So
was Lightning Lord.
The top Villain from the LSH would have to Roxxas. He killed Blok.
That's all, that is an offense punishable by death. He also killed a
planet, Messed up the Legion many, many times, brought back the Trommite
dead, which almost killed Jan Arrah and took him out of the LSH.
Universo was pretty bad, but in a scheming sort of way.
My vote is for Roxxas.
Pete, son of abg
p.s.-Where is Ol-Vir? The Daxamite Darkseid worshipper? I remember him
from the third series, where he was a member of the Legion of
Super-Villains. What happened to him?
Doug Shaw
In article <2ohso4$4...@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, ma...@po.CWRU.Edu (Michael A. Chary) writes:
|>
|> My list would be:
.
.
.
|> 24. Terra-Man
...Thank you for saving me the trouble of mentioning him.
"Ah been waitin' all these years t' pay yuh back!"
Abhiji...@transarc.com
> p.s.-Where is Ol-Vir? The Daxamite Darkseid worshipper?
Darkseid turned him to dust in an LSH annual : the one where Imra
learns Validus is her son. Seems like a rather nasty way to treat your
followers, but this is Darkseid.
As far as main legion villains go, it has to be Mordru the Merciless,
created by the great writer Jim Shooter (obl. Rich Johnston flamebait).
Darkseid misses out only because he's more of the ultimate DC villain.
Abhijit
Xxxelmophile
> That's all, that is an offense punishable by death. He also killed a
> planet, Messed up the Legion many, many times,
Maybe three: Jan's first appearance; then S/LSH 2-teens, where he went
mad; then the first "arc" in v4. Not much of a career.
So who is the Legion's greatest antagonist?
Darkseid is excluded because he's only had one good appearance (Great
Darkness) and because of his connections to the rest of the DC uni.
Glorith is excluded because she's stupider than T&M's version of Dream
Girl and because she's an inferior copy of a far more menacing figure.
It comes down to the Time Trapper or Mordru. The Trapper has the advantage
in that its machinations have pervaded the whole of the Legion's history.
Ultimately, though, the Trapper failed to withstand the Great Retconning.
For that matter, he failed to withstand a myriad of minor retcons, all of
which owe themselves to his nebulous background.
Hence, for being responsible for the second-best LSH story (Earthwar),
for generally providing a high level of intelligent opposition on every
occasion of their meeting, for rising from defeat countless times,
for returning to glory from a pathetic lobotimization by inferior mystics,
and for never changing in the face of continuing redefinitions of reality,
the title of "Legion's Greatest Antagonist" is hereby awarded to:
Mordru the Merciless
So declared, this 14th day of April, 1994, etc.
--
"Childbirth is NOT a miracle. Life is NOT sacred. When you have twenty
thousand nomads huddled between two rivers in the Middle East and that's it for
Homo sapiens, when one in five children is a live birth, one in ten living past
the age of ten, THEN childbirth IS a miracle and life IS sacred. When the
average age of a grandmother in Philadelphia's housing projects is twenty-five,
to call childbirth a miracle is at least a tasteless joke and at worst a true
obscenity."--Dave Sim
Michael A. Chary
Tom & Mary Bierbaum were the greatest LSH villains.
Pulsar Stargrave had the best name though.
Paul Moorehead
|> Surprise, surprise, I'm going to have to disagree.
|> Galactus as a bad guy? No. A foe, at times, but not really a villian.
|>
(stuff deleted)
|> 20. Mr Myzltplk... Mykzlplxk... You *know* who I'm talking about!
If you aren't going to include Galactus, because he's not really evil, then
neither should you include this native of the fifth dimension, (I'm not even
going to *try* to spell it) because he's really just mischeivous.
Paul
M'Woody
Doctor Doom seems like a clear No. 1 villain to me. He is perhaps (as
was mentioned before) the biggest megalomaniac in comics. Doom wasn't
the leader of the "bad guys" in Secret Wars for no reason.
Now this alone doesn't put Doom at the top for me, but Doom also has a
very strong sense of nobility and honor. Remember, he's been trying
for years to rescue his mother's soul from Mephisto. Doom is very
nearly a tragic hero.
M'Woody
A Small Glenn in Germany
Yeah, I'm with you all the way on that one. When I was a kid, I
always pictured Sauron (of Morder) as a darkly colored clone of
Mordru. :-) That cover of Mordru sticking his arms out the vault is
one my all-time faves, too. I'm a big fan of the later Adventure
Legion stories, say what you will about Shooter, but I loved 'em!
Pax ex machina,
Unglenn
......................................................................
"What do you mean we're undead!?
So what's that? The Uncola of the Living?"
--- Allred
g-car...@uchicago.edu, if you must know
......................................................................
ba06823
|> So who is the Legion's greatest antagonist?
|>
|> Darkseid is excluded because he's only had one good appearance (Great
|> Darkness) and because of his connections to the rest of the DC uni.
|>
|> Glorith is excluded because she's stupider than T&M's version of Dream
|> Girl and because she's an inferior copy of a far more menacing figure.
|>
|> It comes down to the Time Trapper or Mordru. The Trapper has the advantage
|> in that its machinations have pervaded the whole of the Legion's history.
|> Ultimately, though, the Trapper failed to withstand the Great Retconning.
|> For that matter, he failed to withstand a myriad of minor retcons, all of
|> which owe themselves to his nebulous background.
|>
|> Hence, for being responsible for the second-best LSH story (Earthwar),
|> for generally providing a high level of intelligent opposition on every
|> occasion of their meeting, for rising from defeat countless times,
|> for returning to glory from a pathetic lobotimization by inferior mystics,
|> and for never changing in the face of continuing redefinitions of reality,
|> the title of "Legion's Greatest Antagonist" is hereby awarded to:
|>
|> Mordru the Merciless
Lets try not. The Dominators managed to take over Earth (which the big M failed
at at least three times), disband the Legion for longer then anyone else did and
in the end destroyed the Earth. They may not have a funky hat or nifty powers
but the Dominators used cunning, skill, and diplomacy in leu of force. They are
truely great and original villians. not another maniac with Ultimite Cosmic
Power and ittly bitty mental capasity.
AIM
john nevins
>M'Woody
well...that really depends on who is writing him. I remember one issue
of _Supervillain Team Up_ (there - now I've really dated myself) when Dr.
Doom attempted to exercise droit de seigneur on a poor village lass -
hardly the act of a "tragic hero."
IMNSHO, I think Perry, from the Elektra: Assassin series, was the perfect
villain, simply because he was _so_ evil. There wasn't a single
redeeming aspect about him, except the humor that I got from his character.
By the way, has anybody else noticed the physical similarities between
Dr. Beaker, in Elektra: Assassin, and Dr. Clayton Forrester of Mystery
Science Theater 3000?
Basho
"d'oh!"
Markku Herd
with some rather unusual attributes.
--
-- Markku Herd ( he...@lut.fi )
** PLEASE NOTE: Some quantum physics theories suggest that when the **
** reader is not directly observing this message, it may cease to **
** exist or will exist only in a vague and undetermined state. **
Slash Maraud
<My vote is for Command Kid.>
--
MARAUD OUT>
MIMIC RULEZ! MIMIC RULEZ! MIMIC RULEZ! Y'know, I'm too old to spell like that.
I will walk with with my hands bound, I will walk with my face scarred,
I will walk with my shadow flag, into your Garden, Garden of Stone.
Mean Mister Mustard
Xxxelmophile <mor...@fnalo.fnal.gov> wrote:
>
>As I've said before, if I have a bomb capable of destroying the moon (which
>the Doms *are* responsible for), I don't hide it and skulk around. I
>flaunt it: Surrender to us or we'll blow up your planet.
Why would the Doms need to flaunt it? They *already* ran the planet, and
nobody knew they ran it (except for the resistance, and before the moon
explosion the Doms probably didn't regard the resistance as a major threat).
They didn't have to tell Earth to surrender: Earth had surrendered already.
Besides, they could never actually govern Earth if their only means of
control was a big bomb. Sooner or later, something would have to snap....
and considering how Triple Strike and the moon explosion only accelerated
their own demise, the Doms might have done better if they hadn't built their
little bombs in the first place.
Marc
Xxxelmophile
> The Dominators managed to take over Earth, disband the Legion for longer
They took over the Earth and disbanded the Legion only by writerly fiat.
Every single Dominator assigned to Earth in v4 was a lackwit, with the
exception of the commander who came in near the end of Terra Mosaic
precisely because the local Doms were screwing up so badly. The Doms
we saw on Earth took over only because the writers wanted them to and did
it offscreen.
They didn't destroy the Earth, either, or don't you recall the Sledgehammer
Moral of #38: Pollution Is Bad--We Did It to Ourselves.
As I've said before, if I have a bomb capable of destroying the moon (which
the Doms *are* responsible for), I don't hide it and skulk around. I
flaunt it: Surrender to us or we'll blow up your planet.
--
JANUARY 1994: Marvel announce a major new direction for Barbie Fashion.
Barbie is killed in a car crash, and four seemingly identical women fight for
the right to replace her over the next few months. Ultimately, the real Barbie
returns and slaughters the imposters with an Uzi. Says editor Carl Potts,
"It's a more grim and gritty direction, and I don't think that side of Barbie
Fashion has been properly explored."--Paul O'Brien Predicts
elmo (mor...@physics.rice.edu,mor...@fnal.fnal.gov)
Ron Asbestos Dippold
performances can always be explained away by Doom robots of some sort.
--
Don't hate me because I'm beautiful. Hate me because I'm beautiful, smart
and rich. -- Calvin Keegan
Steve Simmons
>>21. Ozymandias.
>> I still consider him the bad guy. And he got away with it.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Which makes him one of the best villians of all time. He should be higher
>up on the list IMO, especially considering he managed to put away Dr.
>Manhatten.
Nu? Go reread the last section. Manhatten is gone, but obviously
isn't telling something. Then we see the diary at the publishers
office. They don't know what it is yet, but the writer is seconds
from opening it in the last panel.
Manhatten undoubtably knows all of this, which explains his somewhat
lofty amusement on the whole topic.
Ozy lost, and lost big.
--
Msen, Inc - $HOME for the $HOMEless in Michigan. BBS, Internet access, IP
connectivity. 320 Miller Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48103, 313-998-4562.
The Mystic Mongoose
>>>21. Ozymandias.
>>> I still consider him the bad guy. And he got away with it.
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>>Which makes him one of the best villians of all time. He should be higher
>>up on the list IMO, especially considering he managed to put away Dr.
>>Manhatten.
>
>Manhatten undoubtably knows all of this, which explains his somewhat
>lofty amusement on the whole topic.
>
>Ozy lost, and lost big.
Not nessecarily. You're making an assumption that I'm not making...
that the newspaper will *read* and *believe* and *print* the story. Plus,
you also assume that people will believe the ravings of a psychologically
damaged person rather than a sucessful, sane millionaire.
Now, this might well occur. And it might well not. The point of the
last page is that no plan is ever perfect.. there's always someone,
somewhere, that can mess you up. Doc Manhattan said it best: "Nothing ever
ends". Utopia is unattainable.
But still, at least for a little while, Ozy has killed half of NYC and
put himself as a behind-the-scenes ruler of the world. He got away with it.
|The Mystic Mongoose | ____________ |Jack Kirby, 1917-1994
|r...@gandalf.baylor.edu| / _______ |Creator, Artist,
|Robert W. Armstrong | | ______ |Writer, Visionary,
|P.O. Box 83641 | | _____ |The 'King' of comics.
|Waco, TX 76798-3641 | \__ _____ |He will be missed.
Mean Mister Mustard
The Mystic Mongoose <r...@gandalf.baylor.edu> wrote:
>Steve Simmons, s...@garnet.msen.com writes:
>>>The Mystic Mongoose writes:
>>>>21. Ozymandias.
>>>> I still consider him the bad guy. And he got away with it.
>>
>>yet, but the writer is seconds from opening it in the last panel.
>>Manhatten undoubtably knows all of this, which explains his somewhat
>>lofty amusement on the whole topic.
>>
>>Ozy lost, and lost big.
>
> Not nessecarily. You're making an assumption that I'm not making...
>that the newspaper will *read* and *believe* and *print* the story. Plus,
>you also assume that people will believe the ravings of a psychologically
>damaged person rather than a sucessful, sane millionaire.
>
> Now, this might well occur. And it might well not. The point of the
>last page is that no plan is ever perfect.. there's always someone,
>somewhere, that can mess you up. Doc Manhattan said it best: "Nothing ever
>ends". Utopia is unattainable.
> But still, at least for a little while, Ozy has killed half of NYC and
>put himself as a behind-the-scenes ruler of the world. He got away with it.
I agree with most of the Mongoose's analysis -- we really can't be sure
whether the New Frontiersman will print Rorshach's journal, or whether
anyone will believe it. However, I don't think that Ozy "put himself as a
behind-the-scenes ruler of the world," at least not with his little alien
stunt.
Sure, he "saved the world," and he shaped the course of the future, but did
he really set himself up as ruler of the world?
My personal conjecture: yes, he did in a sense, but not by bombing New York
with an insane exploding psychic alien. He did it through his "secret
weapon"... the media.
Think about it. He *knew* that the USA and USSR would come to terms after
his scheme (and even if they didn't come to terms, they'd blow up the world
and so it wouldn't matter anyway), so he could invest in all the appropriate
companies, buy land in the right areas (and sell any property he had in
Manhattan), etc. He probably owns Burgers & Borscht! And Veidt Industries
is probably busy "investing" in new Soviet markets, too... But the main way
Veidt can "take over the world," so to speak, is by manipulating media images.
We see this through the add for Milennium, the new candy whose name I can't
remember (it replaces Mmeltdowns), etc. -- anything advertising cooperation
or utopia sells. And guess what blond billionaire is selling it?
I feel sorry for the people of that world. All of them are living under the
shadow of Ozymandias.
Marc
The Saint
>19: PAD for not putting me in a comic yet.
You!?? I'm still wondering when Peter's going to put *ME* in
a comic. Even if it's just getting squished by the Hulk, or taking
a boot in the groin from Doc Samson. Or especially the guy that
Betty finally decides to cheat on Bruce with! Peter knows I have
this thing for blondes.
Heeeeyyyy ... come to think of it ... Rick Jones' neighbor
DOES look awfully familiar ...
You don't suppose ...
Peter?
====================================================
"In 1994, I'll be back with my regular,
controversial, pissy attitude."
Todd McFarlane
Nov. 1993 - E.G.O.*
====================================================
Gary St. Lawrence The Saint sa...@ctron.com
Jeff May
Upon re-reading my (now tattered) softcover, I found something that left
me a little disturbed about Ozy's supposed nobility. He lied about the
deaths of his three servants, suggesting that they had caused their own
demise, rather than owning up to it. Why bother?
I know I'm reading too much into Moore's plans, but I tend to think that
Ozy was in a state of denial, and is just a lee-tle beet insane. Damn,
I'd like to see a sequel!
--
Regards, Jeff May (ah...@Freenet.carleton.ca)
Coming to you LIVE the Nation's Capital, Ontario Canada!
ba06823
In article <1994Apr17...@fnalo.fnal.gov>, mor...@fnalo.fnal.gov (Xxxelmophile) writes:
|> ba0...@podsun9.cc.binghamton.edu (ba06823) writes:
|> > The Dominators managed to take over Earth, disband the Legion for longer
|> > then anyone else did and in the end destroyed the Earth.
|> > but the Dominators used cunning, skill, and diplomacy in leu of force.
|>
|> They took over the Earth and disbanded the Legion only by writerly fiat.
|> Every single Dominator assigned to Earth in v4 was a lackwit, with the
|> exception of the commander who came in near the end of Terra Mosaic
|> precisely because the local Doms were screwing up so badly. The Doms
|> we saw on Earth took over only because the writers wanted them to and did
|> it offscreen.
|>
the point?
The dominators commited dastlier deeds and more effectivly than any other LSH
villian (possible exception of Mordru). Also I found them scarier than any
wizards with "Ultimate Cosmic Power" because they're more realistic. Their
politicial and manipulative skills are also original. Every superhero team has
thier share of colorful foes. the doms are different. Besides the LSH did not
defeat them, the subs
and the UP fleet had to. I think for skill, effectivness and pure evil the doms are
#1.
AIM
Why not Rent-a-Mob for your next gathering?
Braly Ronald F
>
>
> Upon re-reading my (now tattered) softcover, I found something that left
>me a little disturbed about Ozy's supposed nobility. He lied about the
>deaths of his three servants, suggesting that they had caused their own
>demise, rather than owning up to it. Why bother?
>
> I know I'm reading too much into Moore's plans, but I tend to think that
>Ozy was in a state of denial, and is just a lee-tle beet insane. Damn,
>I'd like to see a sequel!
>
>
I think that Ozymandius was quite insane. I think that this was the root
of his genius, too. Too me, a part of insanity is to see your world from
a different, unaccepted perspective, and he definitely had that. I also
think that the major significance of "Black Freighter" was to reflect upon
the mind of Adrien Veidt.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ronnie Braly ("Someone with entirely too much time on his hands")
rfb...@usl.edu
Portions of the preceding were recorded.
As for the rest of it,
I'm very much afraid it was all in your mind.
Mean Mister Mustard
Braly Ronald F <rfb...@ucs.usl.edu> wrote:
>
>I think that Ozymandius was quite insane. I think that this was the root
>of his genius, too. Too me, a part of insanity is to see your world from
>a different, unaccepted perspective, and he definitely had that. I also
>think that the major significance of "Black Freighter" was to reflect upon
>the mind of Adrien Veidt.
Remember, right after he's "saved the world," Adrian tells Jon that he's
trying to make himself feel the guilt... and every night, he has a dream
where he swims out to a black freighter...
Adrian Veidt brought peace to the world, but that peace arrived on the
backs of dead men.
Marc
JSinnott
first released and made them avalible at an ftp site. Anyone know where this
mythical site is?
While we are at it, where are the Sandman annotaions?
Thanks,
-John
do...@earlham.edu
s...@garnet.msen.com (Steve Simmons) writes:
>Nu? Go reread the last section. Manhatten is gone, but obviously
>isn't telling something. Then we see the diary at the publishers
>office. They don't know what it is yet, but the writer is seconds
>from opening it in the last panel.
>
>Manhatten undoubtably knows all of this, which explains his somewhat
>lofty amusement on the whole topic.
>
>Ozy lost, and lost big.
Assuming that anyone takes the _New Frontiersman_ seriously enough
to credit their accusations. The _NF_ was actually the closest to the
truth before anyone else, with their "Missing Americans" article (on Max
Shea, Nina Paley, etc.). This didn't exactly start a huge manhunt to find
the conspirators who were kidnapping our best and brightest.
My guess? The _NF_ runs Rorschach's diary. It has vague
accusations against Veidt, but nothing concrete (Kovacs mailed it before
he had the scheme explained in detail). Since _NF_'s antipathy for Veidt
and fondness for Rorschach is well-known, it'll likely be brushed off as a
crackpot conspiracy theory. And I think everyone's happy enough with
their brave, new world that they won't try to rock the boat too badly.
--Doug
allan b goodrich
In retrospect, the Dominators probably are the greatest villains in the
history of the LSH. Let's list a few reasons:
-They took over Earth. Not the Khunds, not Mordru, not Universo, the
Dominators.
-They put a lot of people into those pods beneath the cities of Earth.
Where is Myg nowadays? I liked him a bit. The sonic powers dealie
sucked tho. Where is Squire? Wildfire II? Where is Flynt Brojj? A
Dominion stooge. He used to be the biggest Legion booster.
-Sun Boy's corruption and destruction. The corruption was sort of
expected, as Dirk was always sorta slimy. The Doms helped a helluva lot
though. Plus after their Triple Strike backfired, he got fried just when
he returned to the side of the angels. And I wish I had not used that
cliche.
-They killed the Legion. Black Dawn was a factor, but their domination
of Earthgov really offed the LSH. As Ayla put it once, "the Legion was
becoming a haven for super-powered misfits
-They killed a lot of good supporting characters, and f*cked over many
others. Kill list:Atmos, Don and Dawn. F*cked list: Flynt, Flare,
Squire, Dirk, Myg, Polar Boy and they also-
-KILLED BLOK! I really hated this because he and Timber Wolf were my
faves next to Jo. They made the best team, IMO and when they ordered
Roxxas to off him, me blood began to boil.
I am aware that the Doms didn't pull the trigger themselves, but I
still hold them responsible. Why don't they kill Laurel?
Pete, son of abg
ba06823
In article <CoKzL...@freenet.carleton.ca>, ah...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Jeff May) writes:
|>
|>
|> Upon re-reading my (now tattered) softcover, I found something that left
|> me a little disturbed about Ozy's supposed nobility. He lied about the
|> deaths of his three servants, suggesting that they had caused their own
|> demise, rather than owning up to it. Why bother?
|>
|> I know I'm reading too much into Moore's plans, but I tend to think that
|> Ozy was in a state of denial, and is just a lee-tle beet insane. Damn,
|> I'd like to see a sequel!
Please no! Watchmen was perfect, it had a begining a middle and fairly definite
end. too many great concepts have been destroyed by unneeded sequals (Highlander
being the best example).
AIM
Pratt Tyler
with the original post (What 20 responses ago?) that Venom is in the top
10. As should Magneto and Dr. Doom.
Ty Pratt
"I have enough confidence, I don't need a sig.
RLMA...@miamiu.bitnet
>
> Upon re-reading my (now tattered) softcover, I found something that left
>me a little disturbed about Ozy's supposed nobility. He lied about the
>deaths of his three servants, suggesting that they had caused their own
>demise, rather than owning up to it. Why bother?
>
> I know I'm reading too much into Moore's plans, but I tend to think that
>Ozy was in a state of denial, and is just a lee-tle beet insane. Damn,
>I'd like to see a sequel!
>
> Regards, Jeff May (ah...@Freenet.carleton.ca)
> Coming to you LIVE the Nation's Capital, Ontario Canada!
>
Well, Ozymandias also lied about the murder of the Comedian. He told
Dr. Manhattan (?) (I haven't read it for quite some time) that he had
hired someone to kill the Comedian, when the truth is that he did the
dirty deed himself. Pretty sleazy, considering that Laurie and Dan
were disgusted with Adrian already.
Here's another thing I gleaned in my re-readings of Watchmen. Does
anyone else put more significance on Adrian's superhero name than
you'd think at first? Remember, the poem featuring his name is a
statement on the temporary nature of tyranny. The tyrant, whose
statue bears an inscription of permanence (analogous to Adrian and
his "brave new world.") when, instead, the statue and its inscription
lay beneath centuries of sand and lie broken from erosion. In the
light of the poem's deeper meaning, I think that Moore is suggesting
that Adrian's plan will ultimately fail.
? "Dish of ice cream? Don't tempt me!!!!" ?
? ?
? Lee Masheter, MSTie savant | Pilgrim of St. Damon, ?
? rlma...@miamiu.acs.muohio.edu | Patron Saint of the ?
? (Shew, that's a big 'un!) | Confused ?
? (Shew, that's a big 'un!) | Confused ?
Tom Galloway
Both and more are listed in the r.a.c. Welcome/FAQ messages (part 5 for
FTP references). See r.a.c.info, or if your site has incorrectly expired
them, see the recent post here on how to get them by FTP or email.
"Just the FAQs ma'am." --Interdragnet
tyg t...@hq.ileaf.com
Xxxelmophile
> history of the LSH. Let's list a few reasons:
>
> -They took over Earth. Not the Khunds, not Mordru, not Universo, the
> Dominators.
Mordru: once in real time plus once in the Mordruverse. Universo: three
times. Just because they got defeated doesn't mean they hadn't taken
over--the Dominators got defeated, too. The fact is also that it only
took the Subs and a few lame-o's nobody'd ever heard of to defeat the Doms.
It took the entire LSH to stop Mordru in Earthwar and Universo in the first
Renegade Legion story.
> -They put a lot of people into those pods beneath the cities of Earth.
So? In the Universo Project, Universo mindwiped and exiled literally dozens
of heroes from across the entire *United Planets* to a single asteroid.
The Doms weren't even astute enough to bottle Shvaughn Erin.
> -They killed the Legion.
No, the writers did. Events in the Five Year Gag are sort of like Cable
popping up out of nowhere and getting recognized by everyone--the Gag is
noncausal and therefore inconsiderable. E.g., if you haven't read the
Earthwar (among others), you don't really recognize Mordru's status as a
villain. Since we *can't* read the Five Year Gag, it doesn't count in the
Doms' favor.
--
"MARCH 1994: Returning the favour, Todd McFarlane pencils an issue of Cerebus
The Aardvark. For one month only, the book outsells X-Force."--Paul O'Brien
Predicts
elmo (mor...@physics.rice.edu,mor...@fnal.fnal.gov)
Mean Mister Mustard
Xxxelmophile <mor...@fnalo.fnal.gov> wrote:
>a...@world.std.com (allan b goodrich) writes:
>> In retrospect, the Dominators probably are the greatest villains in the
>> history of the LSH. Let's list a few reasons:
>>
>> -They took over Earth. Not the Khunds, not Mordru, not Universo, the
>> Dominators.
>
>Mordru: once in real time plus once in the Mordruverse. Universo: three
>times. Just because they got defeated doesn't mean they hadn't taken
>over--the Dominators got defeated, too.
Yes, but only the Dominators could hold on to Earth for *years*... and the
Mordruverse hardly counts, since Mordru could only conquer the universe in
a timeline with no LSH and no Time Trapper/Glorith. The Doms had to contend
with the LSH, the Khunds, Glorith/TT, and Mordru, and yet they were still
the ones who controlled Earth for the longest period of time.
> The fact is also that it only
>took the Subs and a few lame-o's nobody'd ever heard of to defeat the Doms.
>It took the entire LSH to stop Mordru in Earthwar and Universo in the first
>Renegade Legion story.
Do those "few lame-o's" include the *entire* Legion, SW6 batch? *Two* Jan
Arrahs? *Two* Valors? An entire UP fleet? Also, the SUBS of vol. 4 are
hardly the jokers of previous years. And a lot of resistance members/innocent
bystanders gave their lives, too.
Not that I think the Dominators are the greatest villains ever, but you seem
to be downplaying their role a little too much.
>> -They killed the Legion.
>
>No, the writers did. Events in the Five Year Gag are sort of like Cable
>popping up out of nowhere and getting recognized by everyone--the Gag is
>noncausal and therefore inconsiderable. E.g., if you haven't read the
>Earthwar (among others), you don't really recognize Mordru's status as a
>villain. Since we *can't* read the Five Year Gag, it doesn't count in the
>Doms' favor.
Of course, when Mordru took over the Earth (for what, a day?), or when
Universo did, that was *also* the writers' doing...
Incidentally, I feel that the text pages provided a very adequate explanation
of what happened to the Legion, how it happened, and why. The text pages
were fundamental to the success of early vol. 4, and it's too bad they're
gone now. But the point is, the Dominators *did* finish off the Legion.
So the writers chose to tell it in four rich text pages, rather than five
padded-out issues. Good for them.
And regarding the Five Year Gap: all clever names for it aside, it did
something no Legion comic had done in years. It got me interested, even
excited, in the Legion again.
Marc
BruceG6069
writes:
>In retrospect, the Dominators probably are the greatest villains in the
history of the LSH.
Try Mordru, Glorith, and the Time Trapper {the same three villains who are
going to create havoc as Zero Hour comes closer.}
Without the Time Trapper's interference the LSH could not have defeated Mordru
{as shown in the alterate timeline}. Then there is Glorith whose bungling
nearly wiped out the LSH by getting Valor killed. How do you fight villains
who can wipe you out before you even existed?
By the way the diary is the Time Trapper's {he is the _only_ LSH villian who
was "wiped from existance" i.e made to have _never_ existed. Other LSH
villians who are gone are either dead or reformed not "wiped from existance"}
Thomas E. Warnock
Earth was destroyed because of them and their chambers. So not only
did they:
A. Destroy the Legion (especially Sun Boy) by taking over Earthgov.
B. Kill scores and scores of humans by experimenting on them and just outright
killing them.
C. Mindwipe many humans making them slaves of the Doms.
...But they also destroyed the planet.
Not to mention all their 20th century antics...failed invasion of earth...
infecting all Earth's heroes with some disease (and killing some)...
imprisonment and experimentation of thousands of humans on Elia until Valor
freed them...the list goes on and on.
T
--
-
Thomas E. Warnock
war...@acsu.buffalo.edu
v134...@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu
Mean Mister Mustard
kristoff <cta...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
>Everything Veidt did was a waste. In the end, he lost just as big as everyone.
>Here's why:
>
>Crisis on Infinite Earths.
>
>I don't have the issues here with me, but I remember reading it at the time and
> saying "yup,he saved the world just about a month before the big Wall o'
>Energy (tm) comes plowin' through."
>
>Okay, you can say Crisis never affected the Watchmenverse, but I prefer it this
>way. Adds to the tragic futility of it all...
Actually, that universe did survive the Crisis.
You know, Earth-4. The one with all the Charlton heroes. ;-)
Marc
Rampaging Elmo
> Yes, but only the Dominators could hold on to Earth for *years*...
If I recall the timeline, it was about a year from v4 #1 to v4 #36...for
reasons given elsewhere, I don't consider the Gap in the Doms' credit.
During that time, the Legion, such as it was, confronted Roxxas, Mordru,
Darkseid, and the Khunds. They spared almost no attention for Earth.
Once some fraction of the Legion's fighting strength made it to Earth,
it was over in two, three issues.
> Not that I think the Dominators are the greatest villains ever, but you seem
> to be downplaying their role a little too much.
Sure, it's a good debating technique :-)
> Of course, when Mordru took over the Earth (for what, a day?), or when
> Universo did, that was *also* the writers' doing...
Yah, but it was onscreen: we could see him defeat everything the Legion
threw at him up until the very end. That's my point. The Doms we saw
onscreen were imbeciles who were the first to get their disks scraped when
the revolution came.
> Incidentally, I feel that the text pages provided a very adequate explanation
> of what happened to the Legion, how it happened, and why.
I'll trade you a "very" for a "merely" there. Sure, it gave some
information, a few clues and teasers. But the storytelling rule in comics
is "Show, don't tell". We were told about far too much in v4 and we were
shown far too little.
> The text pages
> were fundamental to the success of early vol. 4, and it's too bad they're
> gone now.
I prefer the text pages to be supplemental information about the wider
universe, not *essential* information about missing history. I.e., I liked
the piece about the economic crash, but burying the story of Garth's gimpy
leg in a text piece was a misuse of the format. 'Course, all this is IMPO.
For what it's worth, I'll agree that the text pages were among the best
parts of v4, if only because they did give clues and teasers about the
vital story information the writers were deliberately concealing from us.
> But the point is, the Dominators *did* finish off the Legion.
> So the writers chose to tell it in four rich text pages, rather than five
> padded-out issues. Good for them.
Bad for them. God forbid we should actually see the *Final Crushing Defeat
of the Legion* *the Legion Disbands* *Earth's Greatest Secret* *In This
Issue, a Legionnaire DIES*. Show, don't tell.
> And regarding the Five Year Gap: all clever names for it aside, it did
> something no Legion comic had done in years. It got me interested, even
> excited, in the Legion again.
Fair enough. For me, who'd been interested and excited in the Legion, it
merely made me homicidally irritated.
--
"I write poetry not for publication but merely to kill time. Airplanes are a
good place to write poetry and then firmly throw it away. My collected works
are mostly on the vomit bags of Pan American and TWA."--Charles McCabe
elmo (mor...@physics.rice.edu,mor...@fnal.fnal.gov)
Rampaging Elmo
> Earth was destroyed because of them and their chambers.
No, Earth was destroyed because the C28 Earthgov decided to dispose of
its proton juice by burying it. Or did you miss the Moral Sledgehammer
of "Green" Philosophy of #38, which ends, if I recall, with the line
"We did it to ourselves"?
--
"I've been in the academic world a long time...I can sleep with my eyes open,
which is an important skill for those of you considering jobs in middle and
upper management."--Prof. Ralph Noble
elmo (mor...@physics.rice.edu,mor...@fnal.fnal.gov)
kristoff
Here's why:
Crisis on Infinite Earths.
I don't have the issues here with me, but I remember reading it at the time and
saying "yup,he saved the world just about a month before the big Wall o'
Energy (tm) comes plowin' through."
Okay, you can say Crisis never affected the Watchmenverse, but I prefer it this
way. Adds to the tragic futility of it all...
*****************************************************************
kristoff cta...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
"That was way beyond the limits of good taste."
Beavis
*****************************************************************
ba06823
In article <1994Apr22...@fnalo.fnal.gov>, mor...@fnalo.fnal.gov (Rampaging Elmo) writes:
|> war...@acsu.buffalo.edu (Thomas E. Warnock) writes:
|> > Earth was destroyed because of them and their chambers.
|>
|> No, Earth was destroyed because the C28 Earthgov decided to dispose of
|> its proton juice by burying it. Or did you miss the Moral Sledgehammer
|> of "Green" Philosophy of #38, which ends, if I recall, with the line
|> "We did it to ourselves"?
|> --
neat chambers into the Earth's core.
Besides they still get credit for the Triple Strike. Personally I found that
issue more chilling and frightening than any number of super villian issues. The
Doms greatest strength as a foe is their orginality, every superteam has a dozen
foes with ultimate cosmic power.
AIM
Mean Mister Mustard
<RLMA...@MIAMIU.BITNET> wrote:
>
>Here's another thing I gleaned in my re-readings of Watchmen. Does
>anyone else put more significance on Adrian's superhero name than
>you'd think at first? Remember, the poem featuring his name is a
>statement on the temporary nature of tyranny. The tyrant, whose
>statue bears an inscription of permanence (analogous to Adrian and
>his "brave new world.") when, instead, the statue and its inscription
>lay beneath centuries of sand and lie broken from erosion. In the
>light of the poem's deeper meaning, I think that Moore is suggesting
>that Adrian's plan will ultimately fail.
I agree completely about the name "Ozymandias" suggesting Adrian might fail,
although I think the fate of the future is still left up in the air.
On a related note, I think Moore did a fantastic job of naming his characters
(both real names and superhero names). "Dr. Manhattan" might be an
interesting foreshadowing of the holocaust that hits Manhattan by the series'
end. "Edward Blake" is interesting, since a William Blake quote ends one
of the chapters.
But my favorite name is "Veidt." This always reminds me of Conrad Veidt,
the old Hollywood actor. He often played villains, like Major Strasser in
Casablanca and (I believe) the Invisible Man -- very interesting, in light
of Adrian's comment about "not being an old Republic serial villain."
And Veidt also had the title role in "The Man Who Laughs." Since Adrian
Veidt killed the Comedian, this means he had the last laugh... unless, of
course, the New Frontiersman decides to print Rorshach's journal... and in
that case, look at the shirt that guy's wearing in the last panel!
Marc
Mean Mister Mustard
Ken Arromdee <arro...@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu> wrote:
>In article <2pbr66$3...@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu>,
>Mean Mister Mustard <ma...@wam.umd.edu> wrote:
>>On a related note, I think Moore did a fantastic job of naming his characters
>>(both real names and superhero names). "Dr. Manhattan" might be an
>>interesting foreshadowing of the holocaust that hits Manhattan by the series'
>>end.
>
It was, but considering what happened to Manhattan, there could be an
additional meaning.
Marc
Ken Arromdee
>(both real names and superhero names). "Dr. Manhattan" might be an
>interesting foreshadowing of the holocaust that hits Manhattan by the series'
>end.
I always thought it was a reference to the Manhattan Project....
--
Ken Arromdee (email: arro...@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
ObYouKnowWho Bait: Stuffed Turkey with Gravy and Mashed Potatoes
"You, a Decider?" --Romana "I decided not to." --The Doctor
do...@earlham.edu
ah...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Jeff May) writes:
>
>
> Upon re-reading my (now tattered) softcover, I found something that left
>me a little disturbed about Ozy's supposed nobility. He lied about the
>deaths of his three servants, suggesting that they had caused their own
>demise, rather than owning up to it. Why bother?
>
murder of three people lots better than of a million or so. Dan and
Walter were too aghast at Veidt's actions to really comprehend it; and at
least it served a purpose. Killing his three servants is much more
personal, and I don't think they would have taken it as well.
--Doug
Jonathan Bellack
I don't think the issue at the end of WM was whether Veidt would succeed
in running the world or not--I think the validity of his rationalizations
was in question, whether he really could have some sort of greater
understanding that entitled him to choose the fate of 5 million New Yorkers
on behalf of the rest of humanity. I tend to see the Black Freighter story
as a metaphor for Veidt's actions--many of the BF passages occur directly
before or after Veidt passages, even the early ones where his true
intentions haven't become clear.
Other parts that undermine Veidt:
Despite his vocal contempt for the violence of Nite Owl and Rorschach, he
still felt the need to personally go to NY and throw Blake out a window.
Check out the panel where he's holding Blake over his head (in the
flashback right near the end)--he doesn't look particularly noble covered
in blood.
Despite his supposedly brilliant insights and careful manipulating of the
sentiments of the world (the shift from Nostalgia to Millenium), Veidt's
personal world and corporate image is unbearably bland and homogenized to
the point of being crass. There's no great vision in the Nostalgia ads, no
bold action in investing in baby food, no noble purpose in the Veidt
Method. His calls to personal achievement are new-age mumbo-jumbo.
Remember, his great insight about the world came after eating a hash ball.
I found the panel showing this, where he stands naked on a hilltop, arms
spread like Jon when he reappeared in 1959, to be a parody of his
self-important insignificance compared to Jon.
The last panel of Veidt is a classic--the self-doubt, standing in a corner
in the shadows. Despite his grandiose dreams, Veidt still falls apart
without Jon's approval. He doesn't have the courage to support his own
convictions without backup.
I mean, seriously--even Marvel realized that if Dr. Doom really conquered
the world he'd eventually let it go, that it wouldn't be enough--witness
the graphic novel "Emperor Doom", and much as I hate to admit it the end of
"Secret Wars" was rather interesting for its handling of the omnipotent
Doom. The scene where Klaw taunts Doom with ways the heroes could have
survived, with Doom denying it, upon which Thor's hammer crashes through
the wall, is one of the few moments in SW that I thought had some real
(melo)drama going for it. That, and the 2-page spread where Kirby's 60's
heroes take on Kirby's 50's monsters. 8)
--Jonathan Bellack
bel...@minerva.cis.yale.edu
The day after man discovered fire he invented the hotfoot.
--Dan Clowes, ÒThe LaffinÕ SpittinÕ ManÓ
Cerebus
started in #1 to a resolution--nothing ever ends. The peace the world was base
d is a lie, and the presence of Rorschach's diary ensures that there is always
a possibilty that it will be exposed--the world will always be on the brink in
Watchmen--the clock never strikes midnight. It does not matter what happens aft
er the last issue, because that's not important--the prior events were. So forg
et sequal, Moore has demonstated what he set out to do. As to whether Veidt "go
t away with it," he accomplished what he set out to do, but the fact that he co
uld not anticpate ALL possiblities(the Diary), indicates that he is as flawed a
s the rest, and thus his plan is as well. He won the battle, but lost the war.
Brian C. Saunders
--------------------------------NOTE!------------------------------------
The nickname "Cerebus" is derived from the character "Cerebus the
Aardvark," copyright 1994 by Dave Sim. All rights reserved. Use of this
nickname is not intended to be a infringement of Mr. Sim's trademark.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Damon B. Crumpler
just saw in a post a part about veidt conquering the world-
you know, he never really did want that....
--
We dance around the ring and suppose, but The Secret lies in the
center and knows.(Frost) I know things that have been forgot(Sim)
Knowledge is evil.Infinity means everything is true.Maximal chaos
=maximal homogenaeity.(me) 4.66920(Feigenbaum) z=z(2)+c
Adam Joshua Flisser
I think we have to assume that Veidt has read Percy Bysshe Shelley's
poem "Ozymandias." Otherwise, why choose that name for yourself?
What's interesting about this is that it leads one to believe that Veidt
himself believes that his own efforts will ultimately fail and that he
won't "get away with" anything. As an intelligent person (albeit a
crazy one), he would have to understand that he named himself after a
legendary king who is famous for having a deluded belief that his
monumental achievements would live after him.
This seems strange to me, since Veidt seems genuinely pleased with his
accomplishments, instead of learning from the poetic Ozymandias' false
pride. "Look on my works, ye mortals, and despair!" writes Shelley-
"Nothing beside remains. Round the decay of that colossal wreck,
boundless and bare, the lone and level sands stretch far away."
How could you name yourself after this person and expect to achieve
anything more than temporary greatness? It's inconsistent with the
whole _point_ of the story of Ozymandias.
Do you think this is monumental self-delusion on Veidt's part, knowing
sarcasm on Veidt's part, or the author's message about Veidt's chances
or success?
Sorry- rather, "chances _of_ success."
Interesting thread, isn't it?
Adam
afli6217
Adam Joshua Flisser
Walrus and April
>>I think we have to assume that Veidt has read Percy Bysshe Shelley's
>>poem "Ozymandias." Otherwise, why choose that name for yourself?
>>
>>What's interesting about this is that it leads one to believe that Veidt
>>himself believes that his own efforts will ultimately fail and that he
>>won't "get away with" anything. As an intelligent person (albeit a
>>crazy one), he would have to understand that he named himself after a
>>legendary king who is famous for having a deluded belief that his
>>monumental achievements would live after him.
>
>withstand the test of time. His name however in conjunction with the
>statue did not. I believe this is the same with Veidt. His achievements
>will live on but his name will be forgotten.
No, Ozymandias's achievements did not survive in the poem. All that
remains of the statue are pieces of the legs and the shattered torso,
which lies in the dirt next to the plaque. Besides that, there is
only desert. The choice of the name "Ozymandias" by Moore is a pretty
clear allusion to the failure of the poetic Ozymandias to create
truly lasting works, as well as to his extreme arrogance in believing
that his achievements were unsurpassable by later generations.
Besides which, Ozymandias did not make the statue in the first place,
as Shelley notes that its "frown,/And wrinkled lip, and sneer of
cold command,/Tell that its sculptor well those passions read/
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,/The hand that
mocked them and the heart that fed." In other words, the sculptor
was mocking Ozymandias by sculpting his statue to seem arrogant and
imperious, not mighty or glorious as the king himself would have
chosen. It seems doubtful that a king--particularly one as obviously
haughty as Ozymandias, judging from the plaque's inscription--would
mock himself in such a manner. Even if the statue were counted as
one of Ozymandias's achievements, it would be seen as one which
betrays him as self-important and self-aggrandizing.
In either case, the poem itself very clearly makes the case that
nothing men can do will be unsurpassable or permanent; all things
are ephemeral, no matter how great we think ourselves. In a similar
manner, Manhattan points out to Veidt that his great accomplishments
cannot possibly last with the simple sentence, "Nothing ever ends."
Ah, irony...
>- Moose
>
The Walrus
Jason Michael Borlinghaus
>poem "Ozymandias." Otherwise, why choose that name for yourself?
>
>What's interesting about this is that it leads one to believe that Veidt
>himself believes that his own efforts will ultimately fail and that he
>won't "get away with" anything. As an intelligent person (albeit a
>crazy one), he would have to understand that he named himself after a
>legendary king who is famous for having a deluded belief that his
>monumental achievements would live after him.
I believe that in the poem Ozymandias's achievement, the statue, did
withstand the test of time. His name however in conjunction with the
statue did not. I believe this is the same with Veidt. His achievements
will live on but his name will be forgotten.
- Moose
Carl Muckenhoupt
>>I think we have to assume that Veidt has read Percy Bysshe Shelley's
>>poem "Ozymandias." Otherwise, why choose that name for yourself?
>>
>>What's interesting about this is that it leads one to believe that Veidt
>>himself believes that his own efforts will ultimately fail and that he
>>won't "get away with" anything. As an intelligent person (albeit a
>>crazy one), he would have to understand that he named himself after a
>>legendary king who is famous for having a deluded belief that his
>>monumental achievements would live after him.
Well, Veidt claims that he simply chose the name out of admiration for
Ramses II, but I find it difficult to believe that he had never read the
poem. Even if he didn't know it when he chose the name (ha!), someone
would have pointed it out to him sometime after. More likely, he is
exhibiting deliberate irony, or at least throwing a sop to the principle
of humility. I mean, he's smart. He knows that, however great his
achievements are, they won't last forever. So he chooses a name that will
remind him of this every day, lest he grow arrogant. Mind you, he still
seems to think that his achievements will last as long as he is alive, and
in this he may well be mistaken.
>I believe that in the poem Ozymandias's achievement, the statue, did
>withstand the test of time. His name however in conjunction with the
>statue did not. I believe this is the same with Veidt. His achievements
>will live on but his name will be forgotten.
Shelley describes the statue as "two bare and trunkless legs of stone."
That doesn't sound like withstanding the test of time to me. Besides,
in the poem, the statue is the _only_ remnant of Ozymandias' works.
(Why doesn't someone just post the entire poem? I's only 14 lines long.
I'd do it myself if I had a copy handy.)
Carl Muckenhoupt
David Goldfarb
)(Why doesn't someone just post the entire poem? I's only 14 lines long.
)I'd do it myself if I had a copy handy.)
Oh, fine. From memory, so forgive any slight inaccuracies:
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said, "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, in the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies,
Whose frown, and wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command
Show that the sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
'My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings,
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away."
David Goldfarb |"...with very few exceptions, nothing lasts
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | forever; and among those exceptions no thought
gold...@UCBOCF.BITNET | or work of man is numbered." -- Iain M. Banks
gold...@soda.berkeley.edu |
Ken Small
David Goldfarb <gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
> Oh, fine. From memory, so forgive any slight inaccuracies:
>
> I met a traveller from an antique land
> Who said, "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
> Stand in the desert. Near them, in the sand,
> Half sunk, a shattered visage lies,
> Whose frown, and wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command
> Show that the sculptor well those passions read
> Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
> The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
> And on the pedestal, these words appear:
> 'My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings,
> Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'
> Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
> Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
> The lone and level sands stretch far away."
Ozymandias trivia: this sonnet was written as part of a friendly game
between PB Shelly and another poet (Horatio smith?) who read an account
of the statue's discovery. They each had some limited amount of time
to write a sonnet about it. The other sonnet is pretty terrible, but
Shelly's lives on, and will probably survive longer than the original
staue did!
--
Ken Small ke...@umich.edu
"I used to get A's is psychology class, but it didn't make my life okay."
-- Loud Family
<A HREF="http://www.css.itd.umich.edu/users/kens">Ken Small</A>
dave pierson
wanted his greatest work to unrecognized _as_ _such_?
thanks
dave pierson |the facts, as accurately as i can manage,
Digital Equipment Corporation |the opinions, my own.
200 Forest St |I am the NRA.
Marlboro, Mass 01752 USA pie...@msd26.enet.dec.com
"He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing." A J Raffles