Why did you bother to quote my last posting, but neglect to address any of the points I made?
[b]Notwithstanding, I allow that different people will derive different meanings from this series, or from anything else, for that matter. There are political differences, yet the one US Constitution, there are religious differences, yet the one Bible, Quran, Upanashads, or what have you. I studied critical approaches to both writing and literature, and examined some very different interpretations of various novels and other things. A person who has suffered religious persecution might see Frankenstein as a rebuttal of Calvinism. While another person who is a scientist, might see the same work as a warning against unchecked technological advancement. I know I saw somewhere that that was Tezuka-san's intention with Tetsuwan Atomu. Now, as to whether or not his successors are using the current series to convey that same message, I cannot say with any authority. So, if you see a resurrection theme in the series, good for you. But if you see that theme, perhaps you can cite some specific evidence that supports your opinion.
It should be obvious that Tezuka'San was working to his own plan
And that he could choose his projects and do whatever he wanted.... It is obvious he planned to fuse these elements. Look at the stories he chose to animate. But trying to tell someone who has no knowledge about apocalyptic metaphor,
[definitions went here]
about the works of a master of Heavenly mysteries like Sensei Tezuka'San is impossible. Like trying to read the walls of Egypt without the Rosetta stone..... It is secret.... Intended for the initiated.
Not the casual observer.... Not the adversaries of heaven.
Like a redneck invading the Xaolin temple. Or a Philistine wannabe reading Genesis. The message and metaphor are secret.[/b]
Beyond this, you lost me. I do not want to plow through your dictionary definitions, just use the words you want, & if I need to I will access the Oxford Online Dictionary. I am well aware of the meaning of 'metephor' and 'apocalyptic'. Your posting is really an eyesore.
But, let me now address your statement thus far: Tezuka-San was commissioned by the Vatican to make that cartoon. Just read it. It is right there on that page. You infer that he chose this project to make a religious statement, but you provide no evidence to support that assertion. I think it was simply good business practice to try to find new markets for his talents. However, I have no more evidence for this assertion than you do for yours. Yet, he was a businessman, but not a religious fanatic as you seem to be. Therefore, my assertion is based upon some facts, while yours is based on no such facts. You speak of what should be obvious, and by obvious, you must refer to facts upon which that conclusion is based, but you fail to cite these. Furthermore, I can see by you abuse of the ellipsis that you really lack in writing skills. You should not use an ellipsis in the middle of your own words, but only when you are quoting a source, and excluding content from the middle of it. Any redneck can use a dictionary, but can that redneck argue coherently? You seem bent upon making the same points, regardless of what you seem to be critiquing.
But getting back to my point: You quoted my words, but then failed to address anything I said. This is the hallmark of dogmatism. You simply cannot deal with the fact that I have successfully refuted your assertions. You rely on the one thing that you
think you know, to the total exclusion of all else. You cannot argue against the points I have made, so you argue something completely different. I can look at my response to your first assertion, and see clearly that I address that issue. I take the opposite side, but I am dealing with the same subject. That is coherent thought.
cybotron
Posted: Mar 4 2004, 05:02 AM
Atom was resurrected.
jeffbert
Posted: Mar 4 2004, 02:30 PM
He was not resurrected.
Guest
Posted: Mar 4 2004, 03:05 PM
You [I assume] then fail to address my assertion, but rather point out that he has a soul.
cybotron
Posted: Mar 4 2004, 03:09 PM
"Do you feel Astro is more like the hapless "AI" robot? From the kubrik film?"
jeffbert
Posted: Mar 4 2004, 03:27 PM
I address Guest's assertion, bringing up that the kokoro is not unique to Atom, and that it has nothing to do with resurrection.
cybotron
Posted: Mar 4 2004, 07:25 PM
You then deviate from my last posting, that you even quoted, in which I again assert that resurrection had nothing to do with it. And because I mentioned Frankenstein, you lost track of the subject, Atom and resurrection, and went elsewhere with your drivel. Again, you completely failed to address my point, but rather attacked some of the terms I used to make it. Whether or not Frankenstein has the mind of a murderer,* has nothing to do with Atom being resurrected or having a soul. Whether or not there is resurrection in the Buddha, has nothing to do with Atom's memories, real or implanted.
[Astro's] memories are not false. He visits his old home and makes a penetration like a true Lama. He remembers his old toys.
It is true that he does remember scenes in which he actually did participate, Temna is standing over him as he enjoys a ride on a kiddy swing. However, I can cite a scene in which he looks into a reflective window, but sees Tobio looking back. Moreover, the scene that you cite here
is an implanted memory. Just look at the part where he remembers drawing a picture. That is the human in that scene. Look at the scene in which he visits the old house. He sees a picture of Tobio, remembers implanted memories.
jeffbert
Posted: Mar 4 2004, 11:43 PM
I address the Biblical definition of 'Spirit'.
cybotron
Posted: Mar 5 2004, 01:05 AM
You seem to find some distinction between the biblical definition of 'spirit' and 'ghost'. There is no such distinction. You are so adept with a dictionary, yet, here you use none.
We both go off on different subjects for awhile, usually because they are funny. But then you returned to the point you first made, or that you assert that was your original point. However, there is little in common between
cybotron
Posted: Mar 15 2004, 06:42 AM
I do believe that this was my original point... That there were obvious Apocalyptic elements in Astroboy, and hidden messages that could only be seen by the initiated... Fused elements of the Buddha and Christ, East and West....
and
cybotron
Posted: Mar 4 2004, 05:02 AM
Astro is not "Pinocchio".... We need to understand this. Astro is a resurrected being like Christ or Genesa. The creator of Astro's Good is also the creator of The Atlas evil, and is therefore an analog of God. Clearly. "Pinocchio" has never lived, and was a piece of wood draped wit a garment from the start. Astro has recurring memories of his former life
.
You simply cannot handle being wrong. If I say Atom's Eyes were brown, you try to take the opposite position, but you seem only capable of changing the subject, and would likely say that his boots were red, which may be thrue, but is irrelevant.
*NOTES:
- My reference to the Frankenstein film had only to do with the laboratory scene in which the monster comes to life. There are high-voltage arcs, rising into the air, Sparks flying and other sights and sounds that were also featured in Atomu's activation scenes, whether in the 60s, 80s, or present series.
- However, there are other points:
- I read the novel, I know that the poor creature was rejected because its creator thought it was ugly. As I recall, Atomu was rejected by Tenma for reasons that differed from one series to another. While the reasons were different, the rejection was the same. The creator was for some reason unsatisfied with his creation. Wheter the creation was Atomu or Frankenstein's monster, rejection is a common atheme.
- Both Atom and the monster only wanted companionship and love.
- But, being denied these, they wondered for what purpose they were created. The differences are that only one sought revenge upon its creator. Atom is cute, the monster is ugly.
But you would not know that, because you know only one thing, and that is religion. You therefore see religious themes and meanings in everything.
If this seems a nasty response, recall that you first used the term 'redneck', not I.
