Punisher vs. Punisher

Daredevil vs. Punisher: Means and Ends is basically a story about Punisher fighting himself. He is struggling with his demons and tries to fix himself through what he calls justice. During the first three issues, we experience Punisher struggle to maintain his control. He had to keep reminding himself to stay focus and forget about all the stuff that might jeopardize the mission. When he meets Mary, he can no longer stay focus. Once he sees Mary’s face he can no longer suppress the memories.

Of course what he is doing is not ethical. Killing people, even if they are scum, is still bad. Last class we discussed how Rick from The Walking Dead went from “You kill? You die” to “You kill--you live.” He did it out of necessity, he needed to commit those horrible acts in order to survive. In Bishop’s article there is a quote from Rick to Carl “I do things… a lot of bad things, to help you, to help you and all the other people in our group… That’s the world we live in now… but Carl, you need to never forget… when we do this things and we’re good people… they’re still bad things… You can never lose sight of that. If these things start becoming easy that’s when it’s all over. That’s when we become bad people.” (Bishop 83). There is no doubt that Rick is a good guy, we sympathize with him and we understand why he is doing it. We may even admire his courage and his dedication to his family.

Punisher on the other hand, he is a bit hard to sympathize with because he is not doing it out of survival. I don’t even think he is doing it just to protect the city and bring justice. He has selfish reasons. He is trying to fill the gap his family left. He is trying to bring justice for his own family.

Punisher is trying to release the pain and anger in him. He may not want to admit it, but he enjoys the killing. I think it scares him how much he likes it. It feels good to kill the bad guys. Does that make him a bad person? No it does not. It is very easy for him to kill them because he has a reason. Those criminals have lost all humanity according to Punisher. He is not going around killing people, he is killing monsters. He is killing people who deserve to be killed. He is in control about who he kills. If he loses control, tragedy will strike like it did here:

He starts firing… he is trying to control it… and then…

He lost it. Look at his face. Imagine all that pain being released from his body. Imagine how he must feel after all this time suppressing everything. Imagine how good it feels to pull that trigger and let those bullets flow. Imagine how it feels to lose control. But of course, that comes with a price.

Now look at his face. Look at his pain. He knows why he has been hiding this side. He knows why he cannot let go. Imagine how horrible it feels to pull that trigger and let a bullet hit an innocent man. Punisher did not enjoy that and it was not easy for him. He hated himself for shooting an innocent man. He sees himself becoming the type of person he hates. That is why he is not a bad guy. He is just a man who does bad things. Punisher is complex. He is not a bad guy, but I cannot say that he is a good guy. All I can say is that I sympathize with him, but I know that he will not be able to control himself forever. Eventually and unfortunately, he will be a bad guy. He will never be satisfied and he may not care about who he kills.

Sources:
Bishop, Kyle W. “Battling Monsters and Becoming Monstrous: Human Devolution in The Walking Dead." Ed. Marina Levina and Diem-My T. Bui. Monster Culture in the 21st Century: A Reader. New York: Bloomsbury Academic, an Imprint of Bloomsbury Plc, 2013. 73-85. Print.

Dangerous Curiosity

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, like Frankenstein, has a variety of themes. One theme that I noticed over and over again is that curiosity is dangerous. These people seem to be consumed with curiosity and the desire to seek information. Mr. Utterson is an introvert who usually keeps to himself, but he for some reason became obsessed with finding Mr. Hyde and his relation to Dr. Jekyll. I kept thinking to myself, why the hell is so obsessed? Let it go man! I understand that Mr. Utterson is usually “the last reputable acquaintance and the last good influence in the lives of downgoing men” (1), which clearly shows throughout the novel, but he hasn’t talked to Dr. Jekyll in a long time and it is truly none of his business! His curiosity gets the best of him and ends up consuming much of his time and got him into this strange situation that changed his life forever.

Mr. Utterson tries to find Mr. Hyde, “if he could but once set eyes on him, he thought the mystery would lighten and perhaps roll altogether away” (8). But that rarely happens! Curiosity will get you in trouble, it does not solve anything. There are many times when you have been so curious that you become obsess, and then once you find some answers, you are still not satisfied. So what do you do? You go and find some more answers, and that just leads to trouble. The power of curiosity is so strong, we as humans do not limit ourselves. We want to know more and more, we let curiosity consume our everyday life. We want reasonable/logical explanations and we want them at all costs.

Dr. Lanyon gave in to his curiosity and guess what? He died. At first, all he had to do was help his friend and then go on with his life. But no, he had “gone too far in the way of inexplicable services to pause before [he saw] the end” (40). Even though Mr. Hyde warned him about what he can possibly witness and how it may change his life dramatically, he still decided to seek an explanation. He thought he was prepared, he thought that there was nothing to fear. Why are we so curious? Why do we always need an explanation? Why can’t we let go of things?

Dr. Jekyll believed that “man is not truly one, but truly two,” (43) for he felt like he lived a dual life. He believed that there was part of him who was just like any other man, and the other part was “pure evil,” (45). He was curious of that evil side, he wanted to see what would happen if he separated the two. His curiosity caused such chaos and death. Just because he could do it, it does not mean he should have, we discussed this with Frankenstein. He created a monster, whether he wanted to or not, that is what he did. And why did he create this monster? Because of curiosity!

When is it okay to give in to the curiosity? When do we go too far? How do we know we’ll go too far? We don’t. “It is one thing to mortify curiosity, another to conquer it,” (24) we may be able to suppress our curiosity for a while, but it is hard to control it. We will always want answers, but we have to make sure that we are prepared for the consequences. But that does not mean that we have to stop being curious, instead let’s be curious and cautious. If you are curious, look for answers, but if you reached answers that can be potentially dangerous, stop! Know your limits.

Familiar Concepts Lead to Changes

“Monsters and the Moral Imagination” by Stephen T. Asma sums up a lot of our discussions in class. I feel like we have gotten to the point where we have talked about so many aspects of monsters that we have become familiar with the author’s main points.  

Some examples:

“The uses of monsters vary widely. In our liberal culture, we dramatize the rage of the monstrous creature—and Frankenstein's is a good example—then scold ourselves and our "intolerant society" for alienating the outcast in the first place. The liberal lesson of monsters is one of tolerance: We must overcome our innate scapegoating, our xenophobic tendencies.”

We have talked about this many times. We create these monstrous creatures that serve as our fear for different and unknown and to protect ourselves we condemn them to a life of alienation.

“Monsters can stand as symbols of human vulnerability and crisis, and as such they play imaginative foils for thinking about our own responses to menace.”

We discussed this back when we read “The Monster Within: Post-9/11 narratives of threat and the U.S. shifting terrain of terror.” They reflect what has happened in our lives and how that has changed us. They represent our newfound fears after tragedy.

“In a significant sense, monsters are a part of our attempt to envision the good life or at least the secure life… In order to discover our values, we have to face trials and tribulation, and monsters help us imaginatively rehearse. Imagining how we will face an unstoppable, powerful, and inhuman threat is an illuminating exercise in hypothetical reasoning and hypothetical feeling”

We want to survive and monster stories are exaggerated circumstances of what can happen to us. But they can also prepare us for realistic situations where we might actually have to fight those monsters. This can also be traced back to our post 9/11 discussion or when we read the X-Men comic. The monster represents those struggles and obstacles in our lives that we need to face in order to survive and become better.

We have discussed so many of this points so I wondered, why are we reading about this again? Haven’t we heard all of this before? Maybe we have, but it’s a good thing that we are reading this. It serves much more than just a refresher; it can help you change your mind a little bit or it can confuse you.

Asma’s words confused my perspective of a monster. Throughout this whole course I have placed characters into two different categories: monsters and wrongfully accused monsters. Monsters are usually our enemies who are trying to harm us. Their actions are devastating and unforgivable.  However, there are other characters categorized as monsters who we sympathize with because they have no other options but to act like monsters. The actions may be monstrous, but they are not monsters. The definition changes for each situation/character. Now I am not so sure this is valid. I realized that I was basing the definition on the connection with or feelings towards a specific character. In other words, if the character’s actions were justified by a troubled past or unfair circumstances, the character was not a monster in my eyes and their actions were forgivable.

After reading “Monsters and the Moral Imagination,” I realized that a character’s actions make him/her a monster, regardless of the reasoning behind it. Asma states “if you can gather a man's family together at gunpoint and force them to watch as you cut off his head, then you are a monster. You don't just seem like one; you are one.” This is true, there is nothing that can justify this action. We can make up a story that the man could have done horrible things to the person who murdered him, and this man was just getting his revenge. He is still a monster and his actions are devastating and unforgivable. This is an extreme case, but it can be true for every case. However, I think it is important to state that some monsters are worse than others and that some monsters can change their ways and become better. Furthermore, it is okay to sympathize with monsters, it is okay to feel bad about what caused them to become this way. It is even okay to understand why they are doing what they are doing, but we must realize that they are monsters. Our connections with and feelings towards them does not change anything. At least this is what I think now, maybe next week we’ll read something else and I’ll change my mind again!

Survival with Tights

We are all aware of the discrimination X-Men deal with time and time again for their mutation. So are we going to get something different this time? Nope! And I don't care, I am 100% biased when it comes to X-Men. I will most likely love everything that has to do with X-Men (even that one movie that we never talk about). Just a quick disclaimer before you go on with this post.

The X-Men want to be accepted and they want to be part of society as equals. BUT what they want above anything else is to survive. Survival is at the core of everything. We discussed this last class when we were talking about art. I argue that everything stems from survival. We eat to survive, we reproduce to keep the human race alive, we create technology to make it easier to survive, and so on. Survival is a theme in X-Men. In Astonishing X-Men, whether they admit it or not, the X-Men are doing whatever it takes to survive (at least within issues 1-3, we'll see). Yes they are treated unfairly, yes they are oppressed, but forget about all the social injustices. Those injustices do not matter if they are all dead. So Cyclops decided to bring some of them together and not just "make nice with the public," (23) but "astonish them" (24). Public opinion is crucial to the survival of the X-Men (duh).

Emma Frost gave that depressing speech/warning about how humans will always hate them, they can never trust them, and how they will never be at peace (10-12). It seems like there is no hope for the mutants, so why even try to get the public to like them? Because they see that the Avengers, S.H.I.E.L.D., Fantastic Four and all of the other superheroes are not just tolerated, but loved at times. Cyclops thinks that by mimicking them and creating a team of superheroes, the people will automatically change their perception. He thinks superheroes' tights or spandex will help them survive.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/114AZ0sxe9dyMM/200_s.gif

There is one thing that he is forgetting: mutants are people who developed these powers without any explanation. The Avengers, the Fantastic Four and even S.H.I.E.L.D. obtained their powers either because they are aliens, there was some scientific experiment/accident, or just through training. In other words, they have an explanation for being different. It does not matter that the X-Men created a superhero team, the costumes they wear, the people they save. or how many worlds they save. Nothing matters because the humans will always see the mutants as a threat to their survival. They see them as the "next step in evolution... the end of humankind" (25). Just think about how many times you were intimidated by someone who you thought was stronger, smarter, or more attractive than you. Whenever that happens to me, I feel threatened by their perceived superiority. My instincts tell me to either stay away from them or one-up them somehow. The humans are also doing whatever it takes to survive. The humans however, have the support of the government and other non-mutant superheroes. The mutants have no one. Even Nick Fury and S.H.I.E.L.D. will not help them because they are seen as threats, not allies. The mutants are on their own.

https://lovelace-media.imgix.net/uploads/1143/9983e210-0403-0134-24a3-0e1b1c96d76b.gif?

All X-Men are Monsters

X-Men and X-2 are two of my favorite movies. It is obvious why Dr. MB picked these incredible masterpieces for us to review. X-Men blurs the line between heroes and monsters. Just think of Magneto! He is a monster for kidnapping Rogue, but he is a hero for chaining Stryker. Professor Xavier’s relationship with Magneto represents that blur. He understands him, his actions, and his pain. That understanding is why Professor Xavier is so persistent with Magneto, and why he still considers him a friend.

I could talk about Magneto and Professor Xavier forever, but the movies made think about my definition of a monster more than anything else. I think that a lot of the scenes support my definition. A monster is a reflection of the unknown or of a specific unwanted feeling. The monster’s intentions are not necessarily to destroy and cause chaos, but ultimately that is what occurs. Unlike the hero, a monster is something everyone can become. It is a representation of unwanted desires, uncontrollable feelings, shameful actions, and abnormality. The more you suppress the monster, the more it grows. The monster needs to be let out and accepted to become a positive being.

The humans see the mutants as monsters because it is a reflection of the unknown. They do not know who they are, what they are capable of, and if they are here to help or destroy. The whole Registration Act is made up of all those fears. Once again, think of Magneto. He becomes a monster because humanity made him a monster. Humanity does not want to give him a chance, so why should he try?
In the beginning of X-Men, Rogue sees herself as a monster because her power causes destruction and chaos. She does not want to hurt others, but one touch or one kiss can do just that. Even when she is accepted by the rest of the mutants, specifically Bobby, she is still cautious and does not trust herself. In other words, she suppresses the monster. Suppressing it does not help her control it. I think that she needs to accept that monster and use it.

Mystique has let that monster out. In the conversation she had with Nightcrawler in X-2, he asks her “why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else.” She responds “because we shouldn’t have to.” Yes! You should not have to hide the monster in fear of not being accepted. Although Mystique does not appear in the films as a central focal point, it is clear that she knows who she is, she knows what she is capable of, and she is willing to do anything for all the mutants. She is fighting for a cause, who’s to say that cause is not positive?

Bobby’s family see him as a monster. In X-2 when Bobby’s mom asks him “have you tried not to be a mutant?” I wanted to reach into the screen and punch her. Why should Bobby hide who he is? I think Bobby is proud to be a mutant. His family’s rejection makes him feel like who he is and his desires are something he should not want and be ashamed for.

There is one part of my definition that I disagree with in the case of the X-Men: a monster is something everyone can become. A hero is something everyone can become as well. Everyone has a monster hidden within, and you can use that monster to become a hero. Magneto is just as much a hero as the X-Men. Their causes and methods are different, but they are all heroes. I have realized that my definition is heavily influenced by the sense of not belonging and how you can persevere through that. The mutants persevere through that rejection just like many of us have. Maybe that is why I love X-Men so much.