Selkie

Christian, you are familiar with This Is True, are you not? It's a great source of amusing headlines.

Several years ago, I purchased a number of photo negatives of comic covers and pages "rescued" from the DC office trash bins by an intern. No, never fear, I have no nefarious and illegal plans for them; they just make a neat collectors item. Unfortunately, very few were labeled with identifying information as to what series they were from. I've scanned the mystery images in the hopes that some of the DC faithful can help out. The images that were identified were from The Horrorist and Goddess, so I imagine the rest are from that time period. The scans are less than stellar, but I think only a couple are murky beyond potential recognition. The Swamp Thing negative is gorgeous in person; I'd love to track down whatever comic it was printed in.

Help?

Tim Hunter? If so, from where?

Some Bat-related images

Some Vertigo-related images, plus another Batman. I assume the wild-haired woman is from Goddess?

Sweet Baby Ray's wood-smoked barbeque chicken wings are a reason for this atheist to live. And as I have successfully convinced someone to join me, I'm off to partake in a delicious repast. Play nice while I'm gone.

(I can't be expected to concentrate on repairing tiny toothpick sized pieces of sculpture without adequate nutrition, now can I?)

Aren't you supposed to be sculpting?

Yes, but between fixing the snapped legs on one of the bas reliefs (ugh), and deciding how best to pose a cute puppet so that it looks menacing (harder than it sounds), the siren song of this board has been well-nigh irresistible. I'm starting to fear that the only way I'm going to escape the lure of my keyboard is to tempt someone to accompany me to Sweet Baby Ray's, which is an even higher level of guilty pleasure.

<with deepest apologies from dragging the thread away from the pleasures of Hugh Laurie>

Oh, by the way, I thought the hedonism question was an existential one because existential artists grapple with it. I believe even Camus touched on it - in the absence or universal order or higher meaning, shouldn't I pleasure myself as much as possible? That is, get as much pleasure for myself as possible?

"Not believing in god" does not equal "absence of higher meaning."

<back to our regularly scheduled digression>

For as much as I need to quit hanging around this place, I admit my enjoyment of any board where a serious discussion of suicide and atheism quickly but smoothly morphs into a conversation about the charms of Hugh Laurie.

Now if I'm ever going to get that second Angel finished for Red's viewing pleasure, I need to get out of here!

That's why I said "Hugh Laurie" not Wooster or House. Once she's in presence of the actor in question, she can choose as the whim strikes her.

Brad Pitt? Nah. What Gen needs is a dose of Hugh Laurie.

Large dog sidles up next to Selkie and sits down.

Nice doggie. <pats doggie on head and beams>

Damien doesn't want to go to church. Church is frightening for little boys.

And more than a few big girls, too....

True story: I was once responsible for an investigation into "banning Satanic symbols" at my junior high school. I made a Tardis key in shop class, which I subsequently wore around my neck to class. Apparently someone was afraid it was a Satanic symbol, and stirred up all sorts of brou ha ha amongst the school administrators. No one bothered to ask me what it meant, of course.

Come to think of it, perhaps that's part of why girls were banned from taking shop class with boys the following year.

So, I think we should all place our bets now!

Who will be revealed to be the long-awaited, yet greatly feared Anti-Christ?!

I am. Didn't you get the memo?

Even if I answered "yes" - which I'm not - the avalanche of qualifications would bury the end result to the point that it wouldn't look much like hedonism at all.

I believe it's important to seek out and enjoy the pleasures this life has to offer, as long as that enjoyment doesn't come at the expense of other people. The lines can be fuzzy (Is it acceptable to shop at Wal-Mart? Eat Domino's Pizza? Drive a car powered by fossil fuels? Wear clothes manufactured in countries with questionable labor practices?) but I do my best to ensure the legacy I leave behind is a good one. I have no problem with, say, drinking alohol, but profound problems with people driving while impaired, regardless of whether their blood alcohol level reaches the legal definition of intoxication. I have no objections to non-marital sex, but cheating on a partner in a committed relationship, regardless of whether there's a certificate involved, is a major no-no. Masturbation? Have fun till your fingers fall off, for all I care. Et cetera, ad nauseam.

Now, as I consider posting here to be falling back into old, bad habits, I'm off to get some work done.

A majority of the studies actually say that people who regularly attend church are less likely to commit suicide, and that it has nothing to do with being a Christian or believing in God. I guess this doesn't contradict your point at all.

Not unless you're planning to argue that there are significant numbers of atheists who regularly attend church

Concerning atheists and depression, it's kind of hard to do a factual study, since so many factors can contribute to depression (genetics, home life, job, etc.).

But, about 15% of Americans have been diagnosed with depression, whereas a quick google search shows that 3% of Americans are atheists. Statistically, I would say that there are a lot more believers who are depressed than atheists!

More believers are depressed than atheists because there are more believers. The only relevant study would be one that indicated that atheists suffer from depression at rates higher or lower than that of believers.

Research has found that Agnostics are actually the highest percentage to suffer depression when it comes to atheists, believers, and agnostics.

Would very much like to see that research. Wouldn't surprise me - people hate uncertainty.

At the same time, atheists have more of a connection with this world. We don't have a sky god telling us what to do, so we have to make our own decisions.

Making our own decisions can be hard work and a source of stress, can it not? We don't have the comfort and certainty that a structured religious belief system offers to a lot of other people.

This Earth, this life, it's all we get. After this, all bets are off, and aren't looking good.

There's nothing better to have faith in guaranteed us after we are gone from here. As I was saying, it's always been my belief that because of this fact, it's pointless to end our lives early (barring terminal illness).

For someone not suffering a terminal condition who finds life unhappy here on earth - say, a gay teenager being persecuted in a small town - focusing on the quality of this life without the hope offered by a sky god who is "going to make everything all right in the end" might very well push them toward doing something drastic rather than looking at the long term.

Cool. I hadn't heard that news, and given my childhood fondness for the first two films, I might rent the re-edited version (especially if it lowers the Lois Lane content!)

I've actually read studies that state the opposite of what Selkie posted.

Which part? I said a lot of things.

Researchers talk a lot of shite.

For every supposed psychological article you post on a topic, I can find a hundred psychological articles which state the exact opposite.

So, by all means, do so.

When did the presence of Frank Quitely become a warning sign, rather than a shining recommendation, and a guarantee of superb art (albeit produced at a painfully slow rate)? Did I miss a memo?

Actually, I (and several of my acquaintances not on this board) am the one who missed the first memo that said I was supposed to like his art - and yes, we recognize that we're in the minority. To say that I don't like it is quite the understatement. I recognize his superb technical skills, particularly in matters of perspective (it's not like I think he's Rob Liefeld or anything), but I think his style is ugly as sin. I appreciate that choice in, say, 20/20 Visions or Transmet, but not for much else. I found his Authority work almost impossible to look at, and have steadfastly avoided it ever since. I "get" that he's mocking the physiques usually rendered in superhero comics, but how exactly that's a selling point to readers of superhero comics eludes me.

However, given the stellar and almost universal praise of All-Star Superman I'm reading here, I'll give it a try. I may very well feel the need to wash myself afterward, but next time I'm near a comic shop (this weekend, if all goes as planned) I'll pick up an issue and see.

Would someone here give me the highest level summary of For the Man Who Has Everything? It sounds terribly familiar, like something I may have read, but nothing's coming to mind.

Loved and adored Lex Luthor: Man of Steel

 

That's one quality series, anyone reading this thread who hasn't picked it up really should give the trade a gander - gorgeous Bermejo art and a perfectly nasty Luthor story, Lex's plan in this one is a beauty to behold.

That TPB was a very pleasant surprise for me, especially because (a) I'm not nearly as impressed with Azzarello as seemingly every other Vertigo reader is, and (b) well, the whole Superman thing, not to mention © my only real exposure to the character being the lingering trauma of Gene Hackman as a camp Lex. Turned out to be one of the most exciting things I've read in a good long while. The story is a model of everything I like to see in a tale about a supremely well-crafted villain. The fact that it's just gorgeous to look at (oh, those Dave Stewart colors! in addition to the lovely Bermejo art of course) doesn't hurt.

<snip> but I do suggest trying Superman in small doses, tempered with a character you like.

Had to chuckle at you, of all posters recommending that approach, in light of the fact that I really enjoyed the Veitch Question miniseries, which does in fact contain a "small dose" of Superman. Any excuse to re-read that series is worthwhile in my book.

OK, that sounds like an improvement, but I have to ask: do his people still look like they've been pumped full of helium?

Oh gods, you mean I'm faced with paying actual money for not just a Superman comic, but a Superman comic drawn by .... QUITELY?! :o Someone pinch me and make the nightmare go away. It's a good thing I trust you guys.

I hate Superman. I have always hated Superman. I suspect I will always hate Superman. If you want to understand why I hate Superman, head over to post 38 on this excellent older thread. Here's your chance to sway my opinion. Recommend a Superman TPB or one-shot that's likely to change my mind.

I've read Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? Didn't work. Read the Metropolis Elseworlds. Didn't work. Loved and adored Lex Luthor: Man of Steel and It's a Bird, but of course those aren't really Superman stories.

Go ahead. Surprise me. With the movie coming out, I'm actually willing to try something, and besides, I know that anyone in my circle who sees the movie and likes it will be coming to me for a recommendation. At this point, my recommendation would be Lex Luthor, and, as much fun as that would be, I don't think that will do.

Yes. I'd have to ask them but I think they would resist codifying themselves this way. I think they might agree in spirit but would resist defining themselves so specifically based on their atheism. They would not want themselves described as capital A atheist.

Sound like typical atheists to me, then.

Sorry for the thread drift!

So start talking about suicide, bub. :D

Hahaha!

 

That's what I'm saying, though. I know a few atheists, they all have firmly held beliefs, but none of them subscribe to the Atheist Newsletter or are card-carrying atheists. In fact, most of them find Murray O'Hair and similar figures repugnant.

Forgive me, for perhaps then I've missed the point of your earlier post. All of the above apply to me as well (although I do have some sympathy for "early " Madalyn Murray-O'Hair, but she lost me long before her murder.) Are you saying the atheists of your acquaitance hold beliefs that significantly conflict with what's outlined the Murray v. Curlett petition? I'd be surprised if they did, regardless of what they think of American Atheists or the O'Hairs.

Charlie, how many atheists have you actually met/talked to/corresponded with? As a group, we hate to admit that we share a core set of beliefs, but in reality, there's less diversity of opinion on hot button issues amongst American atheists than all but the narrowest slices of American Christianity, for example. (Probably true of European atheists as well, but it's primarily American ones I'm in a position to talk about.) I have never talked to a single atheist who doesn't have a strongly held moral code, even if we don't have it condified in a convenient handbook. If anything, that moral code is more important to us because there is no forgiveness for our negative actions from the great parental figure in the sky. There is no justice except that which we mere mortals mete out on Earth.

Personally, I've always disliked the term "atheist," in part because I think we're being labeled pejoratively by the opposition. An atheist lacks nothing, despite what the label implies. Unfortunately, in the U.S. more useful terms haven't won much popularity, so even I self-identify with a label I don't much care for.

Now, are we going to talk about suicide, or what?!

The first trailer - "Superman as Jesus" - did nothing for me. I'm sure the character works just as well as a Christ metaphor as he does as an "Jewish immigrant experience in America" metaphor, but it treads dangerously close to the core reasons as to why I hate the character. (At least it's better than the disturbing "Clark Kent as Matthew Shepherd" image that Smallville used in its promos). Later trailers have been interesting enough to convince me to overcome my Superman aversion long enough to see the movie. Winning me over is still going to be a Sisyphean task, but it has a chance. I'll be watching this movie out of faith in Singer & Spacey. I must admit, many of the promo pictures look incredible.

Unfortunately, those later trailers caused me to make the terrible mistake of rewatching Superman II. I adored that film as a kid, but as an adult? I think Christopher Reeves was perfect, downright alchemical, casting. I'll happy watch Terence Stamp as Zod all day. The rest? Umm, well, there was a lot my child's eyes didn't see that make me cringe now. Without a fast forward button, I wouldn't have made it to the end.

I don't collect or display posters, and loathe Superman, but .... I MUST buy one of those Kevin Spacey posters. What a wonderful image.

Besides, it's Lex. I think there's a dispensation somewhere for antihero-lovin' noir fans to buy things with Lex Luthor prominently featured on them .... isn't there?

I've been resisting the impulse to post, but have ben overwhelmed by temptation. Blame my re-read of It's a Bird this morning.

Some light Googling confirmed what I already suspected: religious behavior is correlated with a lower likelihood of suicide. Here's one of many available discussions of the topic. I'm also willing to be that atheists are more likely to be single and/or to come from small families, both additional factors for suicide. I haven't bothered to investigate a correlation between atheism and depression, but based on experience, it wouldn't surprise me a bit. While the foundations of atheism are optimistic, actual real world atheists are usually faced with looking at a world full of selfish little people who hurt other people for no good reason, and without refuge of there being a greater plan that will make it all better in the end.

I'm hardly surprised we're more likely to kill ourselves than believers are. While every atheist's belief system will be somewhat different - after all, there is no Central Grand High Church of Atheism to dictate policy, no Holy Book for the faithful to intepret - I'd say that on the whole, atheists are much more like to emphasize quality of life here on earth, because we aren't concerned about a hereafter. (For as much as I've been known to grumble about the Murray-O'Hairs, they outlined it pretty well in the petition to Murray v. Curlett). We don't have a sky god telling us not to and threatening us with an eternity of torment for deciding to end our own lives, so suicide becomes a decision based on individual circumstances and conscience.

This situation is far from a hypothetical for me. Barring an accidental death, I plan to choose the time and manner my own death, though certainly I hope that won't become an issue for many decades. In other words, no need for an intervention, guys - I'm not planning on offing myself any time soon. If nothing else, I'm far too busy ;) and still haven't liberated the sculptures living in my brain, and there are many, many years worth of them waiting to get out.