Try to Coexist?

The main aspects of this comic that really get me going on a rant of questions is simply this…. how could two people doing close to the same thing have so much hate for one another? Everyone has different ways of dealing with life. This is seen between Daredevil and Punisher. No way is certainly right or wrong, but both hate each other for being different from one another.

As I was reading, I thought to myself that their actions against one another, for lack of better words, their actions were stupid. Now, imagine if the two forces teamed up together and fought against crime. I’m not saying that Daredevil and Punisher need to be best friends, they just need to coexist. As Mary writes in a letter to the Punisher, she mentions how the rate of crime has increased significantly since he’s been put into jail. She also mentions lists the forces that stop crimes in the city, which were the police, Daredevil, and the Punisher. With all of these forces being against each other, they are less focused on the defeat of crime but rather in the defeat of one another.

To me, this matter represents a poor allocation of resources around the city. As I said earlier, everyone deals with matters in a different way. I see where the Punisher and Daredevil are coming from, but they both need to learn to coexist. If they were to coexist, crime would decrease and the city would be a safer place. Both of their end goals are the same, to fight crime and to make the city safe. With this said, they are just making their job more difficult than it has to be. 

Picture: http://heroicuniverse.com/the-best-daredevil-vs-punisher-fights/

Can I Get a Back Story??

I think I've officially cracked the code. I've figured out why comics aren't my forte. As most of you probably can guess about me, I don't like being thrown into unknown situations. Sure I can react on my feet and deal with the punches but I prefer to be overly prepared with notes, color-coded binders, a schedule and a time limit. That is ideal for me. But I also recognize that this doesn't happen very often. However....

I absolutely hate it when it happens in books. I hate being thrown into the middle of a story or a plot or a fight scene and I have to work my way backwards, forwards, and sideways to figure out what's going on. You never know a hero/villian's backstory! I'm assuming there are some exceptions to this rule so please tell me them so I can check them out. I want to know if this is what gets me.

I realized this when I was reading the Punisher/Dare Devil comics. Mostly because I wanted to know what happened to the Punisher to make him so evil and twisted. I wanted to know why the heck Dare Devil is a blind ninja man. Was he always blind? Who trained him? WHAT'S HAPPENING?!?

I prefer novels where I create a personal connection with the main character. I like Frankenstein because I was with him as he journeyed thorough his life. I liked Beowulf because I met him at the beginning of his journey. I hated X-men because I get so sick of the classic "you don't know what I've been through" shpeil. Ok, so then tell me what happened to you. Stop being so complex and mysterious, Wolverine, and maybe we can actually get somewhere with this damn story.

I'm really interested in hearing other peoples opinions about this thought because I've started looking at all my favorite books and theres a distinct trend. Mythology is my absolute favorite because you get the story from beginning to end. There's never a point where Zeus is being all pouty because he doesn't want to talk about his past (he's being moody because he inevitably didn't get his way).

I found myself just getting tired of the lack of background I had on the characters.  I just felt like I had a revelation when I said to Punisher (in my head) "Good god man just talk about it and we can all move past this!" But it isn't just with Dare Devil/Punisher. I think many superhero comics are planned this way and I'm sure there is an exact reason for it. I just don't like it. Maybe I'm impatient. Maybe I'm unimaginative. Perhaps I just want some answers. Like I said, this isn't a fool proof theory, there are plenty of exceptions both ways.

Good Deeds, Bad Seeds

Daredevil believes that the Punisher has completely lost his sanity, and with it, his sense of humanity. However, the Punisher still shows some evidence of having human insides - love.

The Punisher was set up by his environment to become who he is.  He is a Vietnam War veteran, and thus learned a kill-them-before-they-kill-you mentality while on search-and-destroy missions.  Although it is not mentioned in Means and Ends, Frank most likely suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder. When his family accidentally stumbles upon a mob execution, they are all shot and killed on the spot - except for him.  He fails to protect his family and is left to bear this burden for the rest of his life.  Frank thinks of his deceased wife, Maria, often, and becomes captivated with a girl named Mary due to her resemblance to Maria--he even initially calls Mary "Maria." With such a horrific past, it is only understandable that he would become a troubled vigilante.  How could we not sympathize with a man that doesn't need to be convicted, but receive help for all of the psychological pain he's endured?

The Punisher continues to protect the innocent and is devastated when he accidentally shoots an innocent bystander.  He yells out in shock with a look of horror on his face and immediately starts running to the man, thinking he may be able to get the man to the hospital and save his life.

"I lost control.  I have crossed the line."

The Punisher also becomes involved with the Bastelli family and protecting Martin from the mob.  The Punisher chases after Martin once he leaves the hospital, finding him at the family apartment.  As predicted, the mob was waiting and the Punisher must fight them off in a shoot-out.  Daredevil arrives, and mid-altercation, the mob has returned, shooting Martin dead and injuring Daredevil.  The Punisher stares at Martin's body, devastated yet again that he has failed to protect the innocent.

Daredevil puts the criminals in jail - but it is evident that this doesn't stop them from managing to communicate with the outside and orchestrate crimes.  In Part IV, Daredevil confronts a woman after visiting her imprisoned husband and unknowingly relaying information for a judge to be assassinated.  Hell's Kitchen is a bottomless pit of criminals, and putting their leaders in jail doesn't prevent them from organizing crimes.  At the end of Part VI, Daredevil reads in the newspaper that the crime rates continue to escalate even after the Punisher is imprisoned.  He then merely looks out the window pensively, as though he wonders if he's done the right thing by taking the Punisher off the streets.



Reference:
Lapham, Dave (w & a), Edgar Delgado (c), Chris Eliopoulos (l), Mike Sellers (l), and Joe Caramagna (l). Warren Simons, ed. Daredevil vs. Punisher: Means and Ends. New York: Marvel, 2006.

Monster Eating...

What a way to end the semester – truly, this war of ideologies exemplifies just how complex the issue of heroism vs monstrousness really is. At no point in this comic is there a moment where I can safely say who is right and who is wrong. So, I won’t do that. What I will say, is that Daredevil is the hero of this story.

I think his role is made clear not only be his willingness to see people as generally good – I feel that sort of optimism is central to the character of a hero these days, and heroes that don’t possess a similar mindset are few and far between – but also where he ends up at the end of this six-part series. That is to say, he continues on his merry way doing Daredevil-things. But what about Frank?

Well, The Punisher ends up in prison – which is extremely fitting. To be frank, pun intended, The Punisher is a monster. A wild animal. And wild animals get put into cages for the safety of others. However, doing good or doing what is right is not solely within the purview of heroes. Monsters like Frank do “good” on a few levels:

First of all, within the context of the comic there’s no denying that “the system” is highly flawed, and Frank helps remedy that issue by working outside of the system. He serves to cross the line other heroes are not willing to cross in order to get the job done, and permanently removes threats to society from its confines – the only thing protecting them from punishment is plot-armor. Here’s an analogy: Biologically speaking, a “good” cell is programmed to kill itself if it ever becomes unviable for the good of the macro-organism. Cancerous cells, however, typically lack this property, and continue to wreak havoc and propagate until they’re dealt with or the body can no longer function. Additionally, the body doesn’t always recognize them as threats. So, like a really good white blood cell, Frank hunts these cancers down and ends them in an effort to remove the cause of the degradation of his society. Unfortunately, that kind of behavior is regarded as more or less intolerable by society – the sliding gray-scale of society also makes it impractical – and Frank’s an unstable person that makes mistakes.  

Additionally, and let me jump back to number five of those seven theses from Monster Culture for this one, The Punisher and characters like him serve as a call-to-arms for the heroes of their stories. They unveil the ugliness of their settings, and challenge the righteous to step up their game, lest their more merciful methods be left by the wayside.

In short, Frank’s a monster that eats monsters. He’s not acceptable by society’s standards – and wouldn’t the world be bleak if he was – and he’s not really a hero, regardless of the good he sometimes does. However, he does keep the line between the common folk and the other monsters in check, and offers heroes a look at just how bad it can really get…

Y’know, I think Nietzsche had a quote about hunting monsters.

Resources:

Cohen, Jeffrey Jerome. "Monster Culture: Seven Theses." From Monster Theory: Reading Culture.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996. 3-25.

Lapham, David. Daredevil VS Punisher: Means and Ends. Marvel Comics.

A Righteous Kill?

One of the more complex characters of the Marvel Universe is the Punisher (Frank Castle). Although he attempts to bring peace to Hell's Kitchen, his methods are somewhat unorthodox in comparison to other superheroes. For example, he has no moral quarrel with killing people as long as they are deserving of such a fate in his mindset. A former soldier, the Punisher's unique approach to instilling justice is the polar opposite of his counterpart, Daredevil, who prefers to let the legal system judge the individual's innocence. Daredevil's moral code prevents him from killing. As the Punisher states, "I'm not like him. I'm a soldier. Trained to kill" (Lapham, 17). The actions of the Punisher within the comic leads one to question his/her own morality as to what is correct in a situation of vigilante justice. Are there limitations in the pursuit of justice? Is there such a concept as a righteous kill? Personally, I do believe that in certain instances killing is permissible. However, the constant path of killing appears to have taken its toll on the Punisher, forcing him to view death as the only option in the end.

So far, the Punisher has been lucky with the victims that he chooses to terminate. Most people would agree that the individuals within his sights lacked innocence and escaped justice for too long. However, when he accidentally shoots a bystander during his altercation with Daredevil, the Punisher feels remorse for the individual because of his perceived innocence (Lapham, 20). Like Daredevil, the Punisher possesses a moral compass himself, directing his actions. He would call this moral barrier "the line" (Lapham, 20). To the Punisher, he has already determined his target's guilt and views the finality of death as the only punishment he/she deserves. The problem with the Punisher's ideology is that no one is fully innocent. Therefore, anyone could be his next target. In fact, by completing the killing, one could make the argument that the Punisher is no saint either because of the path of vengeance he undertakes as a result of his family's murder. His method is a final solution to a problem that never ceases to exist.

But is the Punisher justified in his actions? Since his victims are involved in heavy criminal activity, most people can push aside his deeds since that means there is one less criminal on the streets of Hell's Kitchen. Daredevil's methods work for a short period, but eventually, the criminals he puts behind bars find their way back to the same activity they pursued before their arrest. The Punisher believes that he is on a righteous cause. However, at this point, I consider him beyond the point of saving, revealing no strain of humanity within his being.

https://i0.wp.com/fusion.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/daredevil_titulka_53.jpg?resize=1600%2C900&quality=80&strip=all

I pledge that I have neither given nor received any unauthorized aid on this assignment. Anthony King

Sources:

Lapham, David. "Daredevil Vs. Punisher (2005) #4." Marvel.com. Marvel Comics,13 Nov. 2007.

             Web. 27 Nov. 2016.

Are People Inherently Good?

Although I was confused at the start of this comic, after clearing things up a little in class, I was able to come back and read the rest of it in a new light. And I have to say, it was pretty cool. I even liked the dual narration by the end of it; the juxtaposition of Daredevil's and Punisher's mindsets showed me which character I empathized with more. And honestly, that was the weirdest thing about this comic for me... I really found myself agreeing with the Punisher more than Daredevil.

Needless to say, we are inclined to think that morally, it is not right to kill another person. Even though that is how the Punisher decided to fight crime, I think that his arguments were much more realistic and practical than Daredevil’s. Sure, in a perfect world, Daredevil’s ideas could come to light. If you just rough someone up a bit, make sure they suffer a little for what they did, maybe they will realize the error of their ways and decide to change. However, that’s honestly not at all the way people work. 

It’s really hard for people to change; they have to really want to. You can’t force someone to change the way they think and the way they live their lives. It’s nice to think that people are inherently good… but are they? In the comic, I feel like this question is highlighted a lot… and the answer is arguably not on Daredevil’s side. For instance, a lot of the plots that Jackal and his henchmen formulated could not have gone on without the paid help of others. Save for the woman visiting her husband in jail who clearly did not know she was part of any plot – a lot of these regular “inherently good” citizens were willing to tell lies for money. I’m sure they didn’t think of the implications of their lies… but still. Is lying for money an inherently good thing…? I would think not.

Additionally, the Punisher was the only one getting any results. At the end of the comic, we hear from Mary’s letter that crime had skyrocketed after the Punisher was put in jail. Obviously, crime goes down if there are less criminals around… However, I think that it’s possible some criminals “came out of hiding” once they heard the Punisher was in jail. Sure, that’s a lot of speculation… but if I were a criminal and knew there was a random guy around that would not just put me in jail, but kill me at any moment, I might decide not to commit a crime. Take away that extra fear and of course, crime would increase.

I don’t know… I mean, I’m honestly still not 100% convinced and on Punisher’s side. But really… is punching a murderer in the eye and throwing him in jail going to make him change? I really don’t think so. I mean, look at the Punisher. At the end of the comic, he had been beaten up by Daredevil and put in jail. I don’t know about you guys, but I don’t take him saying that “this time, there will be no compromises. No mercy. This time, I’ll get it right” (page 148) to mean he’s learned anything.