|
|
Post by philman on Feb 5, 2020 8:02:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by wies on Feb 5, 2020 8:07:32 GMT
So the Ether is apparently the Unseen. Also interesting that Katherina's activities are not magic to Zimmy, despite having seen her Etherical form. So more clarification (still vague) on what is not magic, and still a follow-up to come on what then magic is.
Wonder whether Zimmy would what was behind the ROTD's "mirror and smoke" classify as magic or not. Probably not, since it is one of the things Annie couldn't "see".
|
|
|
|
Post by Zox Tomana on Feb 5, 2020 8:18:03 GMT
So more clarification (still vague) on what is not magic, and still a follow-up to come on what then magic is.
I think the thing Zimmy is going for is that there isn't magic in the Gunnerverse, just stuff you can't explain how it works. It's all regular. It all follows rules. You're not violating the fundamentals of the world by having gods like Coyote or flame elemental spirits transferring bodies. It's all simply part of the unseen goings-on of the universe that we haven't yet, and may never be able to, wrap our minds around. |
|
|
|
Post by imaginaryfriend on Feb 5, 2020 8:21:12 GMT
I assume that since Zimmy's asserted that there's no such thing as magic then nothing is magic by her definition. It sounds like she's saying that stuff just is.
|
|
|
|
Post by wies on Feb 5, 2020 8:24:44 GMT
So more clarification (still vague) on what is not magic, and still a follow-up to come on what then magic is.
I think the thing Zimmy is going for is that there isn't magic in the Gunnerverse, just stuff you can't explain how it works. It's all regular. It all follows rules. You're not violating the fundamentals of the world by having gods like Coyote or flame elemental spirits transferring bodies. It's all simply part of the unseen goings-on of the universe that we haven't yet, and may never be able to, wrap our minds around. Yeah, I agree that that is the likeliest possibility. It is a bit Lovecraftian in that it goes against the idea that we can wholly understand and comprehend the universe. Deeply antitethetical to the Court. |
|
|
|
Post by migrantworker on Feb 5, 2020 8:50:00 GMT
Hey, I remember seeing a similar buildup before. It ended like this. |
|
|
|
Post by pyradonis on Feb 5, 2020 9:00:24 GMT
*yawn*
"What about friendship? Isn't that magic?"
|
|
|
|
Post by artezzatrigger on Feb 5, 2020 9:21:24 GMT
This is just a wild guess, but I think what Zimmy might be getting at is that rather than magic, the world is built on perception. If you can perceive it, whether actually real or imagined, then it's real and always has been.
It ties in very well with Coyotes story about why he doesn't technically exist. Myths and legends say he should, therefore under the collective will of the world, he does.
Perhaps it would also explain why someone like Kat can perceive ethereal beings, but sees things like the rotd or the inside of the arrow differently. They're directed ways the ether is being manipulated, so the way she parses them is a lot more rational and material than someone with a more Mystic perception of the world, rather than something like the psychopomps who are a naturally occurring phenomenon, or something like clippy and his judge friend who have no need to affect their presentation.
|
|
|
|
Post by bicarbonat on Feb 5, 2020 9:35:41 GMT
"Magic isn't real" sounds like a nail gun to the chest, I'll be honest 😂
But I guess it's more about:
- layers of reality in a single place
- what can be penetrated.
The most advanced "science" of the time couldn't see what Jones is "made of", aka the components that formal knowledge requires as part of its definition of "life". So she gets shelved as "Other" in the Court's mind and in ours, but that isn't actually an answer.
To penetrate, you need an "in" (someone/something that can show what your current limits lack) and the ability to accurately engage with the information provided.
Kat and Tony had both, to differing degrees. Kat was able to perceive the RotD enough to see her version (a video cam instead of a giant eyeball), AND was able to engage with it (poking) to achieve a desired outcome (although, maybe the eyeball might have sorted itself out on its own, who knows)
Tony's perception was thanks to an "in" via those forest creatures, and we all know they were pretty sadistic about ~helping~ Tony. And even with that perception "in," he was still ill-equipped to engage properly - like Kat, what he saw wasn't what we did, but his engagement was madly inaccurate.
TL;DR: some people need stronger reality trifocals & maybe a "Proper Etiquette For That Cactus You Thought Was A Green Blob" pamphlet, and I fully welcome the scary 20/20 overlord who can divine the very shrug of dust motes
|
|
|
|
Post by zaratustra on Feb 5, 2020 9:53:32 GMT
See, it's not magic. It's just things that can't be seen by regular people, can't be explained by science, don't happen consistently, and sometimes bend to the will of arbitrary individuals.
But it's not magic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elysium on Feb 5, 2020 9:58:06 GMT
In other words:
IT JUST WORKS
|
|
|
|
Post by Per on Feb 5, 2020 10:33:36 GMT
stuff desu
|
|
|
|
Post by Corvo on Feb 5, 2020 10:34:53 GMT
So it's all a matter of perception? ...I see.
|
|
|
|
Post by wies on Feb 5, 2020 10:55:47 GMT
Hey, I remember seeing a similar buildup before. It ended like this. This made me think that the point of all the swirling mysteries in this comic may that the gunnerverse is inherently mysterious and for a large part unknowable. I mean, it is a good way of conveying that point to your reader. It is plausible that the comic will end without us having any idea what Jones is, and so on for some other mysteries. If that is right, it is an interesting theme for a mystery story where the answers are mostly eventually revealed. This is just a wild guess, but I think what Zimmy might be getting at is that rather than magic, the world is built on perception. If you can perceive it, whether actually real or imagined, then it's real and always has been. (Has been earlier mentioned in a earlier thread, but clearly still relevant) So it's all a matter of perception? ...I see. It is eyes all the way down.
EDIT: If it is all a matter of "eyes", then it is possible there are several sets of rules that govern the universe, depending on your perspective. And the rules you don't understand by the limits of your perspective; why, they might be then termed 'magic'.
EDIT 2: Also Zimmy's saying of the Ether as: "That is just looking beyond what regular people see, it ain't magic! There is a lot more even you can't see." also seems to downplay a bit what Loup is saying about the human viewpoint. Sure, the Etherview may be less limited than the human, but it is also not that important of difference. It is just a different way of seeing. There are more important differences, which feels to me a comment on the whole conflict between the Court and the Forest. Do the differences really run that deep? |
|
|
|
Post by madjack on Feb 5, 2020 11:18:40 GMT
This is just a wild guess, but I think what Zimmy might be getting at is that rather than magic, the world is built on perception. If you can perceive it, whether actually real or imagined, then it's real and always has been. So it's all a matter of perception? ...I see. I'm going to come at this from a weird angle, but I think what Zimmy is saying about the ether is basically the same thing that Loup was saying about Ysengrin in Chapter 68. The ether is basically the sum of human experience, and people's minds get absorbed in their entirety, so while stories and shared experiences carry more weight and enough mass/momentum can produce a being like Coyote, there is always more underneath that isn't perhaps known to anyone except a person themselves. In the case of this example, Annie's time spent with Ys showed her who he is beyond what is commonly perceived, and found that the stories were not quite true to life. So I think what Zimmy is saying is.. Perception is never enough? Or perception is no substitute for engagement/experience with a subject/person/object? |
|
|
|
Post by wies on Feb 5, 2020 11:25:17 GMT
So I think what Zimmy is saying is.. Perception is never enough? Or perception is no substitute for engagement/experience with a subject/person/object? Well, what is the difference between engagement/experience and perception? I think it is more: "Be aware of the limits of your own viewpoint, and try to seek out and learn from other's viewpoints, so you get an at least more completer view." (I mean, I don't think Zimmy is saying exactly that, but that is the conclusion I for now draw from it.) |
|
|
|
Post by wanderer on Feb 5, 2020 11:29:02 GMT
What defines magic?
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisjenl on Feb 5, 2020 12:42:25 GMT
I like this page a lot and I'm curious where this is going too
|
|
|
|
Post by flowsthead on Feb 5, 2020 12:57:17 GMT
See, it's not magic. It's just things that can't be seen by regular people, can't be explained by science, don't happen consistently, and sometimes bend to the will of arbitrary individuals. But it's not magic. Yeah this is how I feel about it. It's a conversation about semantics. Zimmy has a different definition of magic than Annie, and perhaps different than how most would define it. The conversation can be illuminating since different perspectives can lead to different conclusions, but it's not the final word on the subject. |
|
|
|
Post by Runningflame on Feb 5, 2020 14:55:52 GMT
 ( Also pertinent. Actually, a lot of that chapter is pertinent.) So I think Zimmy is saying: Person A can see/do/understand something that person B can't see/do/understand. Person B thinks this is magic, because it's a perception/ability/understanding that they don't have and can't wrap their mind around. But to person A, it's a perfectly ordinary part of how the world works. So from an objective standpoint, it's not magic, because it's ordinary to somebody. Sufficiently advanced technology is only magic to those who aren't used to it. To those who are, it's just an iPhone. |
|
|
|
Post by wies on Feb 5, 2020 15:30:22 GMT
( Also pertinent. Actually, a lot of that chapter is pertinent.) So I think Zimmy is saying: Person A can see/do/understand something that person B can't see/do/understand. Person B thinks this is magic, because it's a perception/ability/understanding that they don't have and can't wrap their mind around. But to person A, it's a perfectly ordinary part of how the world works. So from an objective standpoint, it's not magic, because it's ordinary to somebody. Sufficiently advanced technology is only magic to those who aren't used to it. To those who are, it's just an iPhone. In regards to the altered panels: yeah, that is a good example! Hmm, you got me thinking. In a way stories/myths and science fulfill the same role: to explain the world. Like, thunder. How would have the prehistorical human have felt when hearing that mighty, eardrumming sound? Humans generally can't stand the Unknown. And certainly not when it is something powerful as thunder. So the nordic people put the Hammering Thor there as the cause of the sound. And now we have the explanation that it comes from the shockwave lightning produces in the air. Though, wikipedia still says the precise physical details are being debated. And I wonder, in the Gunnerverse, before people did scientifically investigate the phenomenon thunder, was there ever a shockwave that caused it; or only after the people who believed that died and took that idea into the Ether? In any case: for all the importance placed on science in this comic, there sure is also a lot on storytelling itself. Heck, one of Coyotes most prominent characteristics is that he loves to tell and hear stories (mostly about himself)! And as for the rest of your post I agree. |
|
|
|
Post by saardvark on Feb 5, 2020 16:22:14 GMT
So I think what Zimmy is saying is.. Perception is never enough? Or perception is no substitute for engagement/experience with a subject/person/object? Well, what is the difference between engagement/experience and perception? I think it is more: "Be aware of the limits of your own viewpoint, and try to seek out and learn from other's viewpoints, so you get an at least more completer view." (I mean, I don't think Zimmy is saying exactly that, but that is the conclusion I for now draw from it.) One is passive observation (perception), one is active testing, probing, investigating, etc, maybe? But you're right, taking/exploring other viewpoints is also an important part of a thorough study... |
|
|
|
Post by Gemini Jim on Feb 5, 2020 16:27:21 GMT
Zimmy can see the panels!
|
|
|
|
Post by Corvo on Feb 5, 2020 18:29:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by mturtle7 on Feb 5, 2020 18:50:59 GMT
I assume that since Zimmy's asserted that there's no such thing as magic then nothing is magic by her definition. It sounds like she's saying that stuff just is. I partly agree with you - she doesn't think anything could ever be called "magic", but not that's not exactly because "stuff just is". It's more like, she's saying that "magic" is a such a ridiculously arbitrary distinction, that either everything is magic, or nothing is. It's kind of a running theme in the comic, actually - should Parley and Jimmy's " channels" be considered magic, or just a previously unknown biological effect? Is Jones magic, or just some kind of android far too advanced for us to detect? Are the robots magic, or just hyper-advanced programming that happened to be loosely patterned around some old "golem" ritual instructions? If the ether is magic, how come Kat could interact with it using stuff she considered pure technology?
Zimmy's kinda saying that if you can't define "magic" or "non-magic" (i.e. "science") clearly enough to answer questions like these in the world of Gunnerkrigg, then maybe you should stop calling things "magic" altogether, at least until people can all agree upon a seriously coherent definition.
|
|
|
|
Post by mturtle7 on Feb 5, 2020 18:52:38 GMT
I started writing my post before I noticed this, but honestly I feel like it only supports my argument.
Edit: Also, Corvo Raven Avatar buddies eyyyyyyyyyy |
|
|
|
Post by pyradonis on Feb 5, 2020 20:09:39 GMT
( Also pertinent. Actually, a lot of that chapter is pertinent.) So I think Zimmy is saying: Person A can see/do/understand something that person B can't see/do/understand. Person B thinks this is magic, because it's a perception/ability/understanding that they don't have and can't wrap their mind around. But to person A, it's a perfectly ordinary part of how the world works. So from an objective standpoint, it's not magic, because it's ordinary to somebody. Sufficiently advanced technology is only magic to those who aren't used to it. To those who are, it's just an iPhone. If I was a mighty wizard, magic would be ordinary to me but it would still be magic. |
|
|
|
Post by Gemini Jim on Feb 5, 2020 20:56:15 GMT
( Also pertinent. Actually, a lot of that chapter is pertinent.) So I think Zimmy is saying: Person A can see/do/understand something that person B can't see/do/understand. Person B thinks this is magic, because it's a perception/ability/understanding that they don't have and can't wrap their mind around. But to person A, it's a perfectly ordinary part of how the world works. So from an objective standpoint, it's not magic, because it's ordinary to somebody. Sufficiently advanced technology is only magic to those who aren't used to it. To those who are, it's just an iPhone. If I was a mighty wizard, magic would be ordinary to me but it would still be magic. Exactly. There's a difference between unknowable and unknown. Annie doesn't share Kat's genius level of technical knowledge. What Kat does is on a "Star Trek" level of technobabble, but I get the sense that there's some sort of science behind it. All Zimmy seems to be saying is, "what is, is," which sounds very Ayn Randish, but doesn't actually explain anything. (She's also being confusing by saying "see," when what she means is "observe." Microwave radiation, microbes, black holes can be observed.) EDIT: Well, at least she's not blaming Ether on Midi-Chlorians or something. |
|
|
|
Post by migrantworker on Feb 5, 2020 21:15:20 GMT
Zimmy can see the panels! She still has nothing on Chuck Norris though. |
|
|
|
Post by speedwell on Feb 5, 2020 23:51:34 GMT
( Also pertinent. Actually, a lot of that chapter is pertinent.) So I think Zimmy is saying: Person A can see/do/understand something that person B can't see/do/understand. Person B thinks this is magic, because it's a perception/ability/understanding that they don't have and can't wrap their mind around. But to person A, it's a perfectly ordinary part of how the world works. So from an objective standpoint, it's not magic, because it's ordinary to somebody. Sufficiently advanced technology is only magic to those who aren't used to it. To those who are, it's just an iPhone. If I was a mighty wizard, magic would be ordinary to me but it would still be magic. No. If you were a mighty wizard, magic would be defined as Will over Reality, because in the Paracelsian/Blakean paradigm of alchemical magic that Tom is using as a background for the comic, magic is Imagination manifested by Will and the manifestations of magic are Thought Forms. (Some of us are keeping up.) Think of Blue, the master illusionist. Another way of thinking of it is that the magicians believe they're making themselves into gods. Zimmy, the atheist, quite rightly knows that you can't get to the supernatural from within the natural; even magicians are subject to their status as beings within reality. And beings that are supernatural, if there is even such a thing, can't interact with the natural without becoming part of the natural world themselves (and, importantly, ceasing to be "outside" the natural world). Coyote left that part out. Sure, the Court can be seen as humanity trying to become gods (wizards, exerting will through imagination over the natural world from the "outside", and failing to see that "outside" is a place they can't get to). That's a sneaky clue to imply that the history of the actual gods is more like the supernatural successfully "descending to earth" as a result of the exertion of imagination. |
|
