Then in the last few paragraphs we're presented with a thought on fiction and its relation with the real world (can a fictional character feel real to us? can it be legally patented?), but what this has to do with the rest of the article remains a mystery.

Sorry for the long thread.

Does the article present any proof of this influence of form, rhythm and surface (surface?)? Not sure, it didn't seem to me. Which doesn't mean that it isn't true, it's just that I didn't see any of it in this specific article.

Thus the author presents their conclusion: "From the very beginning, that influence operated not at the level of structure or narrative grammar, but as visual inspiration: a spark of form, rhythm, and surface. Japanese artists, unable to read English, absorbed American comics as pure image."

In the end we're presented with an american comic strip (a parody of Superman?) and four panels with Toriyama's Suppaman. I can't see any connection between the two, except obviously for the Superman-like character, and without the text it's also hard to understand the american strip.

In the first case we're invited to read the sequence with a certain urgency, in the second case we're invited to slow down. But I mean, at least we're back to the topic of "visual techniques".

Tezuka made a whole action sequence without baloons, just a couple of signs in the background, while Toriyama just a single panel without words; the effects to me are completely different because what it's depicted (something that those that use arrows usually ignore) is really different.

Great! But... what this has to do with "the visual techniques [that are] widely shared across Japanese manga"? Oh, we're back to the arrows. Toriyama apparently is echoing a technique used by Tezuka: drawing wordless panels. The connection is thin, they don't really seem the same technique:

is happening here a "technique".
But then the article completely changes.
In Dr. Slump there's a character that is a Superman parody and the author introduces us to the influence American comics have/had on japanese manga. Apparently US culture was something Toriyama liked to parody.

But is that really the effect of a specific technique? I don't know if such a generic thing can be defined as a technique. I'm not even sure that my eyes move in such a robotic way, but even assuming that it's true that they do I don't know if I would call whatever the author is trying to imply

lot of arrows drawn on Toriyama's artworks. "Your eyes go from this point to that point and then...", yeah, which isn't a technique, if anything it may be seen as the effect of a technique on the reader. It's like saying "in this part of the movie you feel sad" and presenting it as a technique.

In general, I didn't understand the article. I didn't get what the author was trying to show in the first part nor what it had to do with the second part.
The essay starts by stating that it's going to explore "visual techniques [that are] widely shared across Japanese manga" but it just shows a

Ah, I didn't know! Nice, always good to have more Frank Miller

He is just doing a variant cover. The actual crossover is by Zeb Wells/Greg Capullo and Grant Morrison/Dan Mora

I went there last year, it's fun! Nothing too spectacular, but I liked the experience.