"As much as I hate to use it, occam's razor suggests
that unless its ever been explicitly stated that some universes can only exist
at some times or there is reason to believe Queen Mami pulled infinite
universes out of nowhere, it seems to be the lesser assumption that Queen Mami
got multiverse info from her multiverse book and that the multiverse is just
neutral without oddly specific existing rules."
Why? How is it more simple? The claim here is that infinite universes exist. Obviously the most conservative claim is the lowball claim pretty much by definition.
Stating Queen Mami got such information from the book or that infinite universes exist are both claims, and both require evidence of which I don't believe any explicit evidence has been provided and as such both are theories which are not falsifiable.
Burden of proof is always with the affirmative claim because that's the claim that WOULD have evidence. As such evidence should be provided Queen Mami got info about number of universes from the book and that the universes that currently exist are infinite.
"Even if we assumed its only refering to the prime
universe, it is constanty mentioned that the fate of the World of the Witches
was destruction, it'd just be that she did it so for the multiverse when she
made her wish (As it was affecting the multiverse the same way)."
That's not an ASSUMPTION, that's simply all that is shown. Burden of proof would fall on someone saying it's the multiverse and so far no statement of Madoka changing every universe or feat of Madoka changing every universe has been shown. It's been numerous showing of "world" and "universe" that are simply being assumed to be Multiverse based on presumably the fact that Madoka can see every universe when the two are not necessarily connected.
"I believe he's refering to the obselete timeline that
Homura's shield is linked to, and by extension the rest of the previous
multiverse / World of the Witches."
Homura's timeline is "connected" to the original universe but I've re-read Wraith Arc during this debate again to try and figure out where the feat is that is keep being mentioned of it having a multiverse within it and I simply can't find it. Homura enters it and there is a clearly large space but nowhere is it remotely stated to be a multiverse.
"Doesn't Madoka save magical girls by destroying their
soul gems? It seems more likely that she did the same to the populations and
moved them over rather than erasing them (Which I don't believe was even
mentioned) when the previous multiverse was destroyed."
To use your own argumnet: Occam's Razor. It seems more "simple" Madoka became a new law that stopped every witch from being born and saved the soul of each magical girl, which caused the universe to change forms then she destroyed the multiverse, made a new multiverse and put the souls of every single person from the original multiverse into the new multiverse especially when to use my argument from earlier there is no suggestion that she did that.
The universe is called a "new" universe but like the analogy I made in the first blog, so did the Flashpoint universe of DC which was thought to have been made strictly by time travel.
"Using Rebellion as contrary evidence is a bit suspect,
since the Isolation Zone is heavily implied to exist (Beginning of Chapter 9,
ending of Chapter 9, and the fact that they are identical outside of the False
City) in the World of the Witches where the concept should still exist via
Kriemhild Gretchen's Ultimate form."
Even so, I don't think the evidence supports that Madoka literally erased the concept of witches as that was not her wish, and it's not what she has shown to have done.
"The Encompassing thingy is why I'm sold on 2-A"
Madoka's concept being everywhere I don't think should be a multiversal feat since A: Her concept is not a physical thing and B: it's never stated to be everywhere on a multiversal scale
"Homura scales to Godoka + can apparently destroy the
multiverse, so 2-A is also fine with her."
Homura's claim isn't of destroying the multiverse. Sayaka asks if her plan is to destroy the universe and Homura suggests that she might. People only assume this means multiverse by reference to other things which is the contention here.
"Erasing/destroying/creating Infinite number of
Universe is indeed 2-A."
Except she didn't do that. Nowhere is that stated. The only things that are ever explicitly stated to be of a multiversal scale is Madoka claiming she wants to kill every witch in every universe before ascending and after ascending stating that she can see every universe. Everything else are assumptions that claims of "world" "Universe" or "everywhere" mean multiverse.
"The fact that Ultimate Madoka erased the concept of
witch from every universe is just a supporting feat. I don't think it should be
removed."
But even granting that it happened, which is not what she wished for and something she never actually showed she could do, it still isn't a multiversal destruction feat or supporting anything. The fact that the universe changed in response to Madoka destroying every witch is not a combat applicable feat. And there's no explict multiversal showing for it to be in support of.
"Except what Madoka did was rewritting the concept of
"Witch" into the concept of "Wraith", which made previous
Multiverse called the "World of Witch" cease to exist, and a new one
called the "World of Wraith" was born."
It's never stated that she turned the concept of "witch" into the concept of "wraith." Also even if that was true how would that be a multiversal AP feat? Shifting a concept, causing the entire multiverse to change does not mean one could just blow up the multiverse if wanted.
The mechanism is important here, that changing the universe caused greater alterations.
"Uh, the fact that Madoka’s concept encompasses
infinite universes is in itself 2-A."
Why? If a character's soul was the size of a universe, we wouldn't say they are universal based strictly on that.
Madoka is a concept, a non-physical thing. Even if you show that she encompassed infinite universes, which was not shown it's simply being assumed, why would her non-physical form being in that many universes suggests she could destroy that many?
That is all that is written for now. These are getting longer so I may no longer be able to reply to every argument though I will do my best.
Alright, wanted to lay out an argument real quick for you why Madoka is multiversal. Tell me which of the claims you disagree with, and we can work from there.
ReplyDeleteClaims:
1. There are an uncountable number of universes within the Puella Magi verse
2. Madoka is omnipresent
3. If Madoka were to instance herself within a universe, she would destroy it
Conclusion:
Given Madoka's omnipresent status, she could just instance herself within each universe across the multiverse simultaneously, thus destroying them all at once, and making her multiversal.
Thank you for replying.
DeleteI agree with 1 (there could be some argument there about whether these are past universes and future universes but I would personally accept it based on the Magia Record statement of their being countless timelines). I disagree with 2 and to a lesser extent the interaction between 2 and 3 though with point 3 I do agree as that is directly stated.
It is stated by Madoka that she would be everywhere however as I try to take the conservative assumption I would not assume this means everywhere in the multiverse. Given the context (That she was speaking to Homura) I would more likely assume that this just means she would always be where Homura is.
I also disagree with the assertion of the interaction between points 2 and 3. Madoka's concept being omnipresent on a multiversal scale, even if I agreed with that, does not seem to suggest that she could destroy the multiverse. That she can physically substantiate and destroy 1 universe does not logically necessitate that she could do so for the entire multiverse.
I'm worried I phrased that confusingly. To rephrase in case that was confusingly worded:
Madoka's conceptual body is stated to be omnipresent on a scale however there is not enough evidence for me to feel comfortable saying that it's on a multiversal scale and even if it was, the fact that she can manifest a physical body capable of destroying the universe (even casually) does not necessitate her being able to manifest a physical body that would destroy the multiverse.
That's a fair enough response. Here's my reasoning for why Ultimate Madoka is omnipresent:
DeleteClaims:
1. The Law of Cycles is a force of the universe (i.e. like gravity or magnetism)
2. Forces are omnipresent (just because there's no charge, doesn't mean electromagnetic waves disappear for instance)
3. Ultimate Madoka is comprised of both the Law of Cycles and Madoka Kaname
Conclusion: Ultimate Madoka must be omnipresent, as the Law of Cycles, which comprises a major chunk of her being, is omnipresent.
The reason I feel confident in making claim 1 is because the way the Incubator's talk about the Law of Cycles suggests it would be considered as a Law of the universe, much like gravity. That's why they needed to make a pocket dimension isolated from the effects of it in order to study Witches.
Claim 3 also comes from Rebellion, as Homura states she tore off only a tiny piece of the Law of Cycles when she split Ultimate Madoka in half. Therefore, both the Law of Cycles and Madoka Kaname must comprise Ultimate Madoka, and it'd be logical to assume she has the qualities of both of them. i.e. omnipresence, physical mass, and being an adorable cinnamon roll
I guess it is a bit of a leap of logic for her to be able to transport the entirety of her being into each individual universe all at once. However, if the mechanics work how I think they do. i.e. Madoka exists as a 3-d being on a different plane in 4-d space from the physical world, and is able to instance herself by simply moving to the same plane, then it should be a rather simple matter.
I don't necessarily disagree but I don't think there is enough evidence to broadly assert point 2 in terms of an abstraction like the law of cycles. In reality, there is much philosophical debate over the nature of abstract concepts and whether they exist in places or universes where any instance of what they are abstractions of exist. For instance, in a universe with less then 2 things, would the concept of 2 exist? At the very least I would not feel comfortable stating that being a conceptual entity inherently gives the character omnipresence. In another magical girl series, Shamanic Princess, the main villain the Throne of Yord is a conceptual entity, yet it's feat are "only" planetary and I would not feel comfortable suggesting that the Throne of Yord is Universal. In Axis Powers Hetalia the cast is comprised of the abstractions of countries. These are pretty much universally agreed to be "only" country level despite being abstractions.
DeleteIn so far as the last paragraph, I am sorry if it disappoints but that leap of logic is to me the sort of central point in my view. I try to stick to only assert characters being as powerful as I can reasonable prove, and would not assert something I do not know for certain is true. It may seem reasonable as an assertion that if her concept is omnipresent throughout a multiverse and her manifesting a physical body can destroy one universe to suggest she could do the same with the whole of the multiverse, however I would refrain from saying so until such time as she does something of that accord.
Apologies if this is disappointing. With my favorite verses especially I try and take conservative estimates to counteract any potential bias on my part.
Fair enough. I guess the only other thing I can posit is that Madoka simply entering a universe is enough to destroy it, which wouldn't even be an attack, her simple existence is just that overwhelming.
DeleteFrom that, it would be natural to assume an actual attack from her would easily be universal, because she'd actually be putting effort into it. Hell, we can even back this up with the arrow that took out Ultimate Kremheild Gretchen.
However, Madoka can also fire an uncountable number of arrows, throughout time and space and across dimensions and universes (seeing as she saves Magical Girls in other universes as well, which MagiReco confirms).
Thus, she could fire a bunch of universe destroying arrows all at once, thus making her effectively multiversal, even if each arrow individually is only universal.
Though I guess this does rely on the assumption that Ultimate Madoka could fire such a large quantity of universe destroying arrows all at once, which I want to say she could, guven her arsenal, but there's nothing to definitively prove it. So I guess it is an effort in futility.
Still, I had fun discussing this with you. Thanks for replying to me.
Madoka's power is indeed consistently above universal and she can fire god knows how many arrows at once, though at the same time...if a solar system level dragon ball character launched 10 ki blasts at once we wouldn't call that multi-stellar ;) maybe in destructive capacity but not attack potency
DeleteThank you for discussing it with me! :) I found it very enjoyable! If you don't mind discussing PMMM in general, do you have a favorite PMMM Magical Girl? Mine is Mami!
>if a solar system level dragon ball character launched 10 ki blasts at once we wouldn't call that multi-stellar ;) maybe in destructive capacity but not attack potency
DeleteTrue, though we are making the assumption that each of those ki blasts would be solar system level. When they might be weaker, given they're smaller than their strongest attacks. The intent of the ki blasts volleys is usually to show a character's desperation, and desperation can often leads to going for a series of light hits (like jabs) to try and feel like you're doing something.
Though again, same could be said for Madoka, she might be only able to fire one of those BFA's at a time. I only make this assumption because her firing multiple arrows all at once is often stronger than her base single arrow attacks across the games.
>favorite PMMM Girl
Probably Madoka or Homura. I flip flop between them a lot. I'm actually happy to see someone who appreciates Mami though. Too many people treat her like a joke, and I think it's because they don't realize how good her character actually is.
I love Mami. The part in ep 3 where she confesses how hard it is to fight alone and yet despite that still cautioned Madoka against joining her ;( <3
DeleteHonestly, yes, I love that scene. I actually made an analysis on Mami Tomoe (and the other Madoka characters), would you want to read it?
DeleteSure! That sounds great! :)
DeleteHere's a masterpost then. Hope you enjoy it:
ReplyDeletehttps://leafbladie.tumblr.com/post/188102835380/madoka-magica-analyses-masterpost
Thank you for sharing! I thought your analysis was amazing! <3 I really loved the parts about how Mami is a thematic parallel to Junko and is a traditional magical girl.
DeleteI'm a long-time fan of the Magical Girl genre and what I see in Mami is a reference to the common Magical Girl archetype of the older veteran that is in some of these series (Sailor Venus and later the Outer Senshi from Sailor Moon, Angel Salvia from Wedding Peach, Caren from Mermaid Melody Pichi Pichi Pitch etc.) and delving into the loneliness and feeling of extreme responsibility that many briefly speak of having felt.
You're welcome, and thank you for your high praise.
DeleteIt's so weird to me that no one seems to talk about the Junko parallel. I mean, it's not the most obvious thing out there, but it would make sense Mami should have a parallel, as the other girls do.
Hope you enjoyed the other analyses as well.
Btw, bit of a tangent, but do you like any of the other spin-off manga or Magia Record?
Sorry for not responding for a bit, had to deal with some serious real life stuff.
DeleteI haven't read all the other analyses yet but so far they're very impressive! :) You seem both really knowledgable and like you have put a lot of thought into it.
I do enjoy the other parts of the Madoka franchise though admittingly not as much. Outside the original anime my favorite spin off is Puella Magi Tart Magica.
No problem, life can suck sometimes. Glad you're enjoying my analyses, they were a fun project of mine, and I'm glad I took the time to write them, when, you know, I still had the time to do such writing.
DeleteMy experience with the spin-offs is much the same. I hate Kazumi, think Suzune is disappointing, sorta like Oriko and Wraith Arc, really like Tart and Tamura, and love the Different Story. Still, even The Different Story doesn't wuite scratch that itch that the series did.
Have you considered trying other Magical Girl series? I'm big into the genre and was thinking about writing an analysis on how Madoka changed the genre and how it relates to series beforehand (in particular how it was unique at the time for being written like a magical girl manga instead of a magical girl anime)
DeleteYes, I actually watched Tokyo Mew Mew when I was a kid, and after Madoka I enjoyed Princess Tutu, Utena, Flip Flappers, and Nanoha. Was disappointed by Yuuki Yuuna, and hated Spec Ops Asuka, and Site (though the latter of which I hate watched).
DeletePlan to watch Symphogear, Sailor Moon, and Card Captor Sakura someday as well.
WOW! That's really cool! I certainly hope you enjoy SM and CCS, they are in my top 5 series ever, I'm mildly obsessed with SM lol! If you want another suggestion you might like Shamanic Princess since some people consider it a spiritual predessor to Madoka.
DeleteThanks for the suggestion, though I always heard that Bojurano was the spiritual predecessor to Madoka. Not sure if you've seen it. I've been meaning to honestly.
DeleteSeries can have multiple spiritual predecessors :P
DeleteHaven't heard of it, but if it's similar to Madoka I'm probably gonna watch it! :)