not what i said at all. you're right that it's the rectangle/square argument, but you're misunderstanding which one i'm saying is the rectangle. and on top of that, i probably still am not fully spelling out my entire point. yes, an item that produces magical effects is magical. but an object that doesn't produce magical effects can also be magical so long as it's made by magic.
See, this is why I'm confused. You're saying both are magical. So what's the point of bringing this up unless you intended to compare and contrast the two examples?
and at the base of Mjolnir's discussion is this: what are the magic effects? the storms themselves, or the bringing about of the storms? again, i say, Mjolnir does do some magic tricks, but the tricks are the cause, not the result. it is the creation of the lightning that is the magic, not the lightning itself.
Your presumption is that the magic item must cause a magical effect. A ferrous object has an innate structure which can allow it to create a magnetic field when acted upon by external forces. Like the core of the Earth. Because it spins, it generates an electromagnetic field. But on its own, it does no such thing unless acted upon. It merely has the qualities.
but that's not really that logical. b/c again, it SHOULD be (and this is how it's almost always depicted) that he's vulnerable to magic spells because it's not something his powers can counterbalance. magical application of force OTOH, he can, because it's still just force.
It certainly isn't depicted that way when Superman gets bitten by a werewolf or a vampire. They're not casting spells from their teeth. So "should" is more a function of your opinion, I'm afraid. And the logica is simple: if the teeth or talons of a vampire or werewolf are sufficiently magical to cause lacerations, then Mjolnir, a weapon described as enchanted, composed from metal described as enchanted, made on a forge described as enchanted should be able to cause contusions and concussive damage.
and it's not Mjolnir's magic properties that paste Joe Schmo, it's the fact that it's a goddamn hammer applied with the force of a thunder god. it's just simple physics, there's no magic inherent in the impact. i'm not saying the blow won't hurt Superman, but it won't paste him either.
I'm really not sure how to re-explain this at this point. I'm asking you to imagine what would happen if someone as strong as Thor hits a normal human with something as hard as mjolnir.
Picture that in your head.
Imagine what that level of force does to a normal human.
I'm saying this: if Superman is as vulnerable to magic as a normal
human is, then he should have NO
superhuman invulnerability against a strike from a magic hammer. And if that hammer is wielded by someone as strong as Thor is, what happens to that normal human is what should happen to Superman. If the hammer was wielded by a dude with the proportionate strength of a dude, it would be no different than a regular guy hitting you over the head with a hammer. Which would hurt, and may potentially be faithful, but since normal dudes cannot pulverize mountains by shrugging, the blow wouldn't turn you to paste.
but again, that has nothing to do with the mountain's resistance to magic. the mountain doesn't fall due to magic; it just falls due to the force of the blow.
You're totally misunderstanding what I've typed.
eh, not really. i'll admit honestly i've never understood just what the fuck Capt. Atom's powers do, but GLs don't do "magic" per se, they just have a ring which creates a plasma-like substance that then forms shapes base on the creator's imagination and molded by their will. they don't change the structure of other materials, or teleport things, or put people to sleep; they're just material constructs. and they fly somehow...i dunno, you got me.
Well...yes, really. The description you provided applies to any number of generic sci-fi energies that are poorly detailed in comic books. Your definition is so generic it could just as easily apply to the Power Cosmic over in Marvel.
And this is mainly because no one really knows the exact composition or science of magic. So generic is as good as it gets.
You don't understand what in the fuck Captain Atom's powers do because even the writers don't, and they define it very generically. And the GLC rings can do more than just create shapes and constructs. They can phase the bearer through solid materials, form telepathic connections (Hal did this in 52, actually), create radiation from whole cloth (Kyle did this when Dominus mind-slapped Superman). And they can generate enough energy to propel the bearer at speeds approaching C. Which should be...impossible. So yeah, it fits your definition. This is not your fault because comic books don't attempt to quantify superhero energies. But if you're not seeing the similarities in definitions (or the lack thereof) it's because you're disinclined to do so.
not really. i've admitted Mjolnir does do some magic: mainly, it creates storms. it is the source for whatever energy creates those storms. but Thor isn't hitting Superman with the creation of a storm, he's hitting him with a storm. actually, he's just hitting him with a big mallet. the mallet itself is not actively creating magic at point of impact. it's more like potential energy at that point, to try and equate it to a real-world phenomenon.
Again, I've at no point mentioned Thor hitting Superman with a storm. I do not see why you keep mentioning this as if I am bringing it up.
I'm talking about a man with a vulnerability to magic being hit by an object that is magic. I do, however, keep bringing up Occam, and will do so again here. Fewest assumptions. You are crafting all these assumptions about the function of magic, about Superman being vulnerable to speels instead of magic and potential energy of a magical item whereas I am simply stating the known facts:
--Superman is vulnerable to magic.
--Mjolnir is a magic item.
No assumptions here. Again, just stating the facts.
2 + 2 need not equal "chair".
but again, that inherent nature is the point. it's just potential magic. by your logic, just because Zatanna has magic in her, just because she can do magic, if she pimp-slaps Superman, it will hurt him just as badly or moreso than if the Hulk hit him, b/c she's magical. but that just can't be the case (can it?). she has to be actively using/doing magic to hurt him. and again i put forth that Mjolnir hitting someone is not an active discharge of magic. i have NEVER seen that to be the case.
I would argue that as a Homo magi, Zatanna has the ability to cast spells, and while she may or may not be innately magical due to her genetics, it's just as likely that those genetics merely allow her to control magic. Whereas Captain marvel or Black Adam inhabit bodies fueled by magic energy, which drives their strength and speed and endurance and toughness. This is supported in theory by the fact that Day of Vengeance showed Enchantress tapping into the flow of energy that powered Marvel. There's definitely some sort of "conduit" there.
Which suggests a difference between a Zatanna and a Captain Marvel.
But even if you disagree with this difference, the alternative (your explanation of Zatanna, that is) is what gives rise to the inconsistency of the so-called vulnerability. It cannot be written consistently without Superman being placed in some circumstance where the laws of his drawback don't just get the better of him, but also of the entire story itself.
i was merely agreeing with your Excalibur point. and i'll agree that Mjolnir would probably bruise Supes (just as a rain of blows from Darkseid or some other suitably powerul foe would). but it ain't just gonna paste him at a tap.
Since Mjolnir is magica and since Superman's resistance to magic is the same as a normal human's, logic dictates that it must.
again, i'll refer simply to my potential magic vs. active magic argument. the hammer is magical, yes, but it doesn't actively do magic when used as a bludgeon. if Thor grabbed the bell, the wheel, and the jar and hit Supes over the head with them, i maintain the same stance.
And I will refer to Occam once more. Logic is as logic does. Potential magic vs active magic is an assumptive interpretation on your part. My argument depends on no such assumptions. The fewer, the better.
i do agree it's a poorly-defined plot device. that's as far as i'll go.
And as it stands, as it is portrayed, operating on as few assumptions as possible, logic leaves us with a single conclusion: as both Superman and Mjolnir are defined and are portrayed, he should resist a hit from Mjolnir as would a normal human.