Bleeding Monk #0 discussion

[kjjohanson]

I've got my own ideas about who the Bleeding Monk is.

Dude
Usurps
Naked
Lover
Of
Wisdom

[lorddunlow]

I've got my own ideas about who the Bleeding Monk is.

Dude
Usurps
Naked
Lover
Of
Wisdom

[jmatt]

I've got my own ideas about who the Bleeding Monk is.

Dude
Usurps
Naked
Lover
Of
Wisdom

How long did it take to dream that up? Clever.

[xodacia81]

The identity of The Monk is obvious: he's Spartacus.

[ShadowTuga]

Got my comics today.
Read this first. 20 minutes ago.

I'm completely *SQUEE* in the best possible way.

Will read the rest of my books tomorrow. Can't digest anything more after this.

10 out of 5. wow.

EDIT- Re-read it already, of course. This is my new favourite VALIANT comic "so far".

[bamaphilosopher]

Okay, read mine today.

First of all, it was awesome! As someone who teaches philosophy, and who's teaching Eastern philosophy this semester, I love all the references to "lovers of wisdom" (the literal meaning of "philosopher"), and the references to Buddhist philosophy.

That said, the pronoun use made this excruciatingly difficult to read. Using "you" when the character is talking about the Bleeding Monk, when it seems to me like the Bleeding Monk is actually the one telling the story. For instance, I'm a little confused by this dialogue, when Kyros is sitting with the ascetic, someone please interpret what you think this means:

"He told me of your coming and described you to me. In his dreams, he has seen your arrival."

First, I'm confused, because the dialogue speaker refers to "me" here, when he had been talking about "you" otherwise throughout when talking about the Bleeding Monk. And, this same ascetic is later dead, so who has he told anything to? Who exactly is speaking, and to whom? Maybe I need to read the issue closely again, but I found this kind of dialogue rather confusing. I may read it again and come back and comment again...I've only read the issue once.

I love Dysart's writing, but I think he was being deliberately obfuscating with some of the dialogue, to add an air of mystery maybe, but so much so that it hampered the story a little bit for me. In my opinion, if you don't know who's speaking, it makes it a more painfully slow read.

But again, I did love this issue, and think it's definitely worthy of the praise some of you have been giving it.

I'm going to read it again, though, and try to figure out who's speaking. It's just not clear on first read.

[bamaphilosopher]

Hmm, reading it again, it still seems to me that the Bleeding Monk is telling the story, addressing himself as "You," to give a sense that his self is kind of outside himself, as it moves through time. If that is the case, the rest of the dialogue in the comic makes sense.

But, this one line still doesn't make sense to me:

"He told me of your coming and described you to me. In his dreams, he has seen your arrival."

What do you guys think? Am I misinterpreting something here?

Someone please explain that line to me.

[jmatt]

Well, now you've got me thinking. Is this some kind of philosopher trick, Bruce? I'll have to peek at those pages again.

[SJS4]

I assumed it was the bleeding monk narrating, and the "you" in question was Harada.

[Keith]

Haven't gone back and read it, but if I recall rightly, wasn't the guide the one saying that line to Kyros?

The naked lover of wisdom foresaw Kyros coming and told the guide about him, nothing more than that.

[Phoenix8008]

I liked it alot. Only 1 read through yet, but I plan another. It wasn't as profound as I thought it would be, but good. Maybe after another read.

[bamaphilosopher]

I assumed it was the bleeding monk narrating, and the "you" in question was Harada.

Hmm...I'll have to read it again with that in mind. Maybe that will solve my dilemma. I wish it had been made more clear, though.

[bamaphilosopher]

Haven't gone back and read it, but if I recall rightly, wasn't the guide the one saying that line to Kyros?

The naked lover of wisdom foresaw Kyros coming and told the guide about him, nothing more than that.

It was a line of narration, so whoever is speaking throughout the comic is speaking it.

[bamaphilosopher]

Well, now you've got me thinking. Is this some kind of philosopher trick, Bruce? I'll have to peek at those pages again.

If it's a trick, it's Joshua Dysart's, not mine!

[leonmallett]

Good strong issue, but not *great* for me. The art was the failing in places - something I have felt more and more lately in VEI books. While I laud using different styles for different eras, I just did not really care for the art in this issue, especially when trying to differentiate some characters with similar attire.

Still it has added layers to the mythology which is no bad thing.

[kjjohanson]

Okay, here's a batshiat crazy idea: since the Monk basically can see all possible futures and pasts (basically the totality of human experience), maybe at some point he becomes disembodied and becomes the Akashic Records. We already see that damage to his physical form has little effect on his ability to live, essentially for his mind to continue to exist. What is his body was completely destroyed? What then?

[bamaphilosopher]

Okay, here's a batshiat crazy idea: since the Monk basically can see all possible futures and pasts (basically the totality of human experience), maybe at some point he becomes disembodied and becomes the Akashic Records. We already see that damage to his physical form has little effect on his ability to live, essentially for his mind to continue to exist. What is his body was completely destroyed? What then?

"batshiat" - is that a creative way to avoid a "squee"?

I guess they probably have no need to destroy his physical body, but you raise an interesting question!

[lorddunlow]

Okay, here's a batshiat crazy idea: since the Monk basically can see all possible futures and pasts (basically the totality of human experience), maybe at some point he becomes disembodied and becomes the Akashic Records. We already see that damage to his physical form has little effect on his ability to live, essentially for his mind to continue to exist. What is his body was completely destroyed? What then?

Well, if he exists in all times how can he be the Akashic record and himself concurrently?

[leonmallett]

Okay, here's a batshiat crazy idea: since the Monk basically can see all possible futures and pasts (basically the totality of human experience), maybe at some point he becomes disembodied and becomes the Akashic Records. We already see that damage to his physical form has little effect on his ability to live, essentially for his mind to continue to exist. What is his body was completely destroyed? What then?

Well, if he exists in all times how can he be the Akashic record and himself concurrently?

I am sure some branch of quantum mechanics theory would suffice to explain it away.

[kjjohanson]

Okay, here's a batshiat crazy idea: since the Monk basically can see all possible futures and pasts (basically the totality of human experience), maybe at some point he becomes disembodied and becomes the Akashic Records. We already see that damage to his physical form has little effect on his ability to live, essentially for his mind to continue to exist. What is his body was completely destroyed? What then?

Well, if he exists in all times how can he be the Akashic record and himself concurrently?

wibbly wobbly timey whimey

[jmatt]

What do you guys think? Am I misinterpreting something here?

Someone please explain that line to me.

You are. I have the issue open in front of me. You are assuming that all dialogue in the squares (and not a balloon) is either Kyros or NLW. It's not.

In this instance, that is the continued dialogue of the turbaned guide leading Kyros to NLW: "Look there, in his place of thought-no-thought. He told me of your coming and described you to me. In his dreams he has seen your arrival... Tonight he will wake and speak with you."

[bamaphilosopher]

What do you guys think? Am I misinterpreting something here?

Someone please explain that line to me.

You are. I have the issue open in front of me. You are assuming that all dialogue in the squares (and not a balloon) is either Kyros or NLW. It's not.

In this instance, that is the continued dialogue of the turbaned guide leading Kyros to NLW: "Look there, in his place of thought-no-thought. He told me of your coming and described you to me. In his dreams he has seen your arrival... Tonight he will wake and speak with you."

Ah, I see, they switched from bubble to caption, and it's still the guide speaking. I didn't catch the use of quotation marks in the captions on first read. That clears things up considerably.

Okay, so who is "He," who is "me," and who is "you," in this bit of dialogue? Now, what Keith said earlier makes sense:

"Haven't gone back and read it, but if I recall rightly, wasn't the guide the one saying that line to Kyros?

The naked lover of wisdom foresaw Kyros coming and told the guide about him, nothing more than that."

Okay, now it makes more sense...the switch from balloon [In his place of thought-no-thought] to caption and quotes ["He told me of your coming..."] confused me.

Now it definitely makes more sense. Thanks for clearing that up for me!

[Sven the Returned]

just looked at the preview.

Oirat Mongols mentioned. Amazing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Obscure history.