DISCLAIMER (angry creators, please read)
[[WARNING! THIS COLUMN MIGHT CONTAIN SPOILERS!]]
"And Chas, no pressure or nothing, but if I and when I ever get back to London, I'm fully expecting to find the same shit-hole that was there when I left-- and not a pile of smoldering ruins, okay?" John Constantine, Hellblazer Presents: Chas-The Knowledge #5.
Shoot, I forgot to mention back in column #97, published on November 11; that that date was The Dissector's third anniversary! 11/11/05 marked the first appearance of The Nitpicker in the now defunct CBEM (which you can still read in archives)... well, happy birthday to me! Well, this is column #100 and I have... nothing special prepared. So, there.
All that said, the DT! from last column was spotted by Snakebyte; the word "fuselage" refers to a part of an airplane, the writer meant "fusillade". Now, what are The Dissector's Picks Of The Week? Best Book Of The Week was Justice Society Of America #20; I can't even remember why, it was probably just fun. The Worst Book Of The Week was Star Wars-The Clone Wars-Shipyards Of Doom... just plain boring and awful. Dissections ensue:
<-------------------------------->
"I KIND OF FORGET STUFF..."
TITLE: Adventure Comics Special-The Guardian (DC).
ISSUE: One-shot.
CULPRIT: James Robinson (writer).
DISSECTION: Jimmy Olsen speaks of the clone Newsboy Legion as if he hasn't seen them in ages, when they helped him during Countdown.
DISSECT-O-METER: 4 Bazzars.
<-------------------------------->
"MULTIPLE PERSONALITIES?"
TITLE: Avengers-The Initiative Special (Marvel).
ISSUE: One-shot.
CULPRIT: Tom Brevoort (editor) and/or Jeanine Schaefer (associate editor).
DISSECTION: Christos N. Gage is credited as "writers". Who would have thought he used ghost writers?
DISSECT-O-METER: 2 Bazzars.
<-------------------------------->
"CHECK IT, MATE."
TITLE: The Dissector (Studio Robota).
ISSUE: 99.
CULPRIT: MaGnUs (writer).
DISSECTION: I wrongly labeled Checkmate #31 as #1 in the Picks. Thanks Snakebyte for calling me on this; two more badges and you make High Admiral. Just in case, and because some have asked for it, here are the roster and ranks of the Honorary Dissector Scout Corps:
Ranks:
High Admiral 53-infinite
Admiral 47-52
Rear Admiral 41-46
Vice Admiral 36-40
Commodore 31-35
Captain 26-30
Commander 21-25
Lieutenant Commander 16-20
Lieutenant 6-15
Ensign 1-5
Current Roster:
Grand Admiral MaGnUs
High Admiral Nysie (Honorary)
Commodore Snakebyte 34
Cmdr. Dominik B. 23
Lt. Cmdr. Miss Kitty Fantastico 16
Lieutenant Guvnor 13
Lieutenant Sully 9
Lieutenant Snarf5181 6
Lieutenant DrSilent 7
Ensign Roy 5
Ensign Bea 3
Ensign Bored 3
Ensign Lucas Siegel 3
Ensign Tylo 2
Ensign Shadz 2
Ensign Mato 2
Ensign Matt Brady 1
Ensign Paul O'Brien 1
Ensign Trasgo 1
Ensign Mean Jeff 1
Ensign Ilustr8r 1
Ensign leahcim 1
Ensign TokerTheKid 1
Ensign Teukro 1
Ensign Wolfie 1
Ensign Jordan 1
DISSECT-O-METER: 4 Bazzars.
<-------------------------------->
"FOGOSA."
TITLE: Final Crisis: Resist (DC).
ISSUE: One-shot.
CULPRIT: Greg Rucka (writer).
DISSECTION: Rucka finally gets Fire's last name correct, da Costa; but gives her first name as "Beatrice", when it's Beatriz.
DISSECT-O-METER: 8 Bazzars. There's also a couple more typos or wrong words.
<-------------------------------->
"GEOFFJOHNS."
TITLE: Justice Society Of America V3 (DC).
ISSUE: 20.
CULPRIT: Geoff Johns (writer) and/or Rob Leigh (letterer)
DISSECTION: Power Girl is named incorrectly as "Powergirl".
DISSECT-O-METER: 6 Bazzars.
<-------------------------------->
"MY BULLETS ARE MADE OF LEAD AND TEFLON, THAT'S WHY THEY CAN'T KILL YOU."
TITLE: New Exiles (Marvel).
ISSUE: 14.
CULPRIT: Chris Claremont (writer).
DISSECTION: Among other things; Psylocke says that her psi-sword is made of "TK energy", and "that it cannot cut" someone. Err... no, the sword is made of psionic energy, that's why it affects minds; it would be able to cut people if it was made of telekinetic energy.
DISSECT-O-METER: 8 Bazzars.
<-------------------------------->
No DT! this time, I didn't feel like it, there was no dissection that could work. We had 5.3 Bazzars average in twelve dissections; pretty normal. Now, the Moments Of The Week. First up, the return of one of my favorite legionnaires:
That's Tellus, in case anyone's wondering, telepath and telekinetic. Next up, Kraven shows a glam killer's best weapon:
Nipple lazors! And look at those pants... To finish, Rockslide again shows his sensitive nature:
He tries, at least. That's it for now, until next time, I'll be on the outlook for more dissections, because (almost) nothing escapes...
THE DISSECTOR!
9 comments:
Congrats on the milestone!
But I was disappointed you didn't celebrate it with a bumper-sized, foil wraparound, guest star, variant extravaganza.
Thanks man; but I can barely keep up (or rather, I can't) with the regular columns. There will be an Autopsy Awards ceremony soon.
hehe. Lieutenant Guvnor... ah, political humor
Hah! That's exactly what I thought when I saw it!
Hey, I didn't know where to put this but I've a few dissections for you to consider when you catch-up with this week.
SPOILER WARNING (Just in case you haven't read that far)
Three...
Two...
One...
Go...
In 'Secret Invasion: Dark Reign' there are a few inconsistencies from the final panel in 'Secret Invasion' #8 despite the one-shot following on instantly from the conclusion to SI. Namor looks like he has instantly developed a bit of stubble and then Norman's tie just seems to vanish. Okay fair enough it is two different artists, but I'd blame Senior Editor Tom Brevoort as there should be some consistency as one follows immediately after the other.
Also at the end they show some previews of upcoming titles and in the 'Secret Warriors' one they have Fury at a monument to Captain America yet it quotes the dates as "1922-2008" whenever he got killed off in 2007. Don't know who to blame for that one though, maybe Brevoort again.
Thanks Guvnor; the date is relative, since Marvel uses a sliding timeline, but that inconsistency on Norman and Namor (who looks like Jean Reno) is worth taking a look at. Thanks!
Comments originally posted on ICS.net, right after the column was posted (Part I):
Nick S.: TITLE: Adventure Comics Special-The Guardian (DC). TITLE: Avengers-The Initiative Special (Marvel).
colons gone out of style?
Also, regarding New Exiles, you are incorrect AND Claremont is incorrect, but not in the way you say he is. Psylocke's sword IS made of telekinetic energy, and has been ever since Claremont's run in the 90s. She sacrificed her telepathy to imprison the Shadow King, and then she swapped powers with Phoenix. Phoenix had godly-level TP, normally co-opting Cable's brain to fine-tine use of his TK, and Psylocke got godly-level TK, more powerful than Rachel's. This is current as of her ressurection, written by Claremont.
So, TK energy, yes. Not cutting someone? Wrong. She can use it to distintegrate matter.
Martín "MaGnUs" Pérez: I know what powers Psylocke has or has traded or not, I read all those comics when they came out. Still, you're right, it's TK energy, but it can cut through stuff as it was butter. In any case, it all comes down to the fact that if something is made of TK energy, it can cut, or at least rip apart, because TK affects matter.
Her sword still affects minds, at its lowest intensity, in the same way her original psionic knife did, and telekinetic energy is, technically, still psionic energy. So while I was wrong in the way I meant stuff, what I wrote was still technically correct.
So I wrote that in a hurry, and Claremont can't even keep his own crap straight. Thanks. No badge for you, though :>.
Nick S.: Actually, her sword doesn't affect minds, it affects the person's nervous system, having much the same effect as if it did affect minds.
You said that the sword is made of psionic energy, NOT TK energy... And by your own argument the two are the same things, so what you wrote is technically incorrect. You also stated that it affects minds, and if it were formed out of telekinetic energy, it would be able to cut people.
Error: It is made out of psionic/telekinetic energy, the two are not exclusive.
Error: It does not affect minds.
Error: It is made of telekinetic energy, and can cut people.
You were talking as if she was a telepathic, and you know it. Now give me my badge and stop being a hypocrite. :)
Sullivan E.: ERROR: DOES NOT COMPUTE.
I see what you did there.
Grand Admiral MaGnUs
Technically, you're a high admiral, since you're somewhere between level 53 and infinite.
Comments originally posted on ICS.net, right after the column was posted (Part II):
Martín "MaGnUs" Pérez: Snake: No, I will not give you a badge. You might be right, but I don't have to give you a badge if I don't want to, and you don't get to call me an hypocrite, since I welcome basically all dissections of my own work, and in fact, write about them when I find them myself. Now, don't get greedy.
Sully: Nope, I'm the Grand Admiral because I'm the maximum authority of the Corps. I don't need to accrue badges to get that rank.
Nick S.: I get to call you anything I want, because I found an error, a genuine error for once instead of just a typo, and you're not reporting it. It's an error. If you're the Dissector, you don't get to pick and choose what errors 'count' or not. You're not reporting it. You're not the Dissector, just the hypocritical Nit-pick-kid with his trademarked rose-colored glasses on.
hypocrite: A person who professes beliefs and opinions that he or she does not hold in order to conceal his or her real feelings or motives
Hmmm. How about someone who claims to report every error but tries to wriggle out of it when he's called out on something more than a typo because he doesn't like being wrong? I'm not getting greedy, in fact I really don't give a damn about the badge for the badge's sake. What I care about is this column's integrity, or, rather, lack thereof.
If this isn't rectified, you'll have lost yourself a reader.
Martín "MaGnUs" Pérez: Good for you. I've already conceded that you're right, I just won't give you a badge for it or report it in my next column... you know why? Because I don't feel like it, this is still my column, not yours, and I'm not accountable to anyone.
If you read my column because you like it, good. If you just read it to catch my mistakes and call me on them, or whine when I won't write about one of them in my next column, then I don't need you as a reader.
You want a rundown on why I think I don't have to report it? Well, here it is:
* The sword is made out of telekinetic energy, which is still psionic energy. Yes, I said it wasn't made of telekinetic energy, that was wrong but I don't think it merits being reported (and I'm still the one who writes the column, not you).
* The sword does affect minds, affecting the nervous system, the way it's been shown in the comics, ends up affecting the mind.
* I said "if it was made of telekinetic energy, it could cut people"; not because I didn't think it couldn't cut people, but because Claremont himself said that because it is made out of telekinetic energy it couldn't cut people.
While you're right in pointing out a mistake I did, I still do not think it merits being reported in my next column. Again, this is my column, not yours. Don't think that because you contribute to it regularly it means that you get to say what I report and what I don't. The most you're going to get is me mentioning the mistake I did in the next column, but it won't be counted as a dissection.
Comments originally posted on ICS.net, right after the column was posted (Part III):
Nick S.: You are very, very wrong. You are accountable to your readers and to the rules you set yourself. You're right. You don't have to give me a badge. But then you become a hypocrite and a liar, and lose any credibility and integrity you once had. You don't get to pick and choose what is and what isn't an error. You only report them.
I read your column for several reasons, one of which being to continuously test my knowledge, another being to see what major screw-ups are being made. And, of course, I do love catching out someone who professes to be infallible, and this allows me somewhere where that behaviour is at least accepted if not enouraged. That was, of course, before you allowed personal bias to interfere with your duty as a columnist. This is not an opinion piece, at its core: You are reporting on errors, and then rating them based on your opinion of severity. If you don't follow your own rules, you aren't worth the bandwidth I'm using to view this page, and I hope everyone will follow my example in no longer reading.
* You also said that telekinetic energy and psionic energy were different.
* Incorrect. The nervous system is not the mind. It merely has an almost-identical effect.
* You are lying and you know it.
Enough with the delusions of grandeur. You made a genuine error instead of a typo, and don't want to be caught out on it, and are trying to use your position as writer to get around the rules and principles you established for yourself and everyone else. This is your error, not mine, and if you don't report on it you are a liar and a fraud. Don't think just because you write this column you can repress things you don't want to be considered errors.
Now, you can go ahead and start using ethical writing practices, or you can keep on with this pretentious crap and let this column be revealed for all it really is; you whining when Vixen's boots or Victor's eyes are colored wrong, and pissing off people like Christina Strain while you hide behind your facade of ethics.
Good day to you, sir. I hope you make the right choice.
Martín "MaGnUs" Pérez: 1) I never claimed to be infallible, I don't know where you get that. You seem to be making up your own rules and guidelines for how I have to behave, or how I write my column.
2) Again, I've admitted to making a mistake, but as with some things I don't report as dissections, I do not think this qualifies as one, and while it will get mentioned in my next column, it will not get an entry and a rating.
3) I never submitted myself to my readers approval or made myself accountable to them; and whatever personal rules I follow, are mine to know, and have never been published for you to read, so do not pretend to be an expert on them.
4) When you say this is not an opinion piece, you're wrong again in thinking you know why or how I write this column. In many aspects it's cut and dry, and in many others, it's opinion based.
5) My credibility and integrity have nothing to do with this column, I never claimed to be a journalist, an impartial judge, or an infallible analyst.
If you don't want to read my column anymore, and you think it's a waste of bandwidth, then stop flogging a dead horse and quit wasting that bandwidth. If other readers want to stop reading it; that's their choice too.
Post a Comment