#that ends up punishing and policing only the most accessible and vulnerable targets with internet access

[hussyknee]

The worst thing the whole Harry Potter discourse has done is making fandom parrot the take: "Death of the Author doesn't apply when they're living and profiting off their work." Idk how we can come back from that one tbh.

#That's. Not. What. Death. Of the. Author. Means. #it's about the fact that the story must be interpreted according to nothing more than what is on the page #that the way you consume and interpret a piece of art relies on nothing more than your own understanding and preferences #instead of authorial intent‚ fiat or motivation or 'Word of God' (info tacked on later by the creator) #it doesnt free you of the onus of consuming it critically while acknowledging it's problems #or finding an ethical way to consume it which includes not giving the creator money if they use it for harmful purposes #so people who use Death of the Author to continue buying the books and merchandise #or simply gloss over the valid criticism of it #and people who rebutt it by implying that Death of the Author LITERALLY MEANS THE AUTHOR'S DEATH #are both stupidly wrong #unfortunately this idea has now rooted itself so deep as the battle line between white liberals and leftists #that it's hard to imagine it being dispelled any time in the near future #ethical consumption under capitalism is necessary and useful #but the west's egoism as usual has taken a concept and rendered it actively counterproductive through hardwired neoliberal individualism #anyway trying to eradicate the third most read book in the world from global cultural consciousness is a fool's errand #that ends up punishing and policing only the most accessible and vulnerable targets with internet access #and making a franchise of wizard school books the battleground of systemic transphobia #is a clear indication of how leftism has been entirely co-opted by the white bourgeoisie #and the fact that how their approach impacts trans and queer people of the global south #is not even on the west's radar‚ let alone having any allyship with our queer folks #harry potter #fandom #fandom discourse #writing #literary analysis #decolonization #knee of huss

[honeylikewords]

This is working! Yay! So the ask I wanted to send you was, what do you think about the writer of the punisher trying to claim it for blm, since so many of the Nazis try to use him as a hero? I know that you've unfortunately have had some trouble with people using your fanfics for things like that, which sucks, as I like your castle fics and wish they weren't used by ugly people. Thank you for changing your theme!

I’m so glad it’s working, too! It’s good to know my theme is functional and accessible, now!

As for the ask, whoof, there’s a lot to unpack. And a lot to say. 

I want to answer this as delicately, thoughtfully, and honestly as I can, so I’ll speak from the heart and from my own personal, political perspective; obviously, I’m not a Black person myself and don’t want to speak over Black voices with regards to BLM and the global experience of systemic racialized violence, so my opinion is only my own, based off my own experiences, and what I’ve discussed with Black people and other people of color. 

I also ask that no one reblog this; I don’t really feel like getting into internet arguments about this topic or having this post spread around; it’s just my personal opinion, and people should be critical and form their own in their own ways vis-a-vis their own experiences and understanding.

That being said...

It’s complicated.

I think that there’s an inherent problem with The Punisher as an extant story. As a character. Regardless of creative intent nowadays, he is very much a product of male violence fetishization; he has been from his very inception. He has lasted as long as he has as such a major comic figure because people are drawn to his brand of lawlessness, his violence, his darkness, and that’s... really, really bad.

That isn’t to say we can’t have antiheroes, or violent stories-- we can and should explore many different kinds of stories, even dark ones-- but that the way we hold them up in culture, especially here, in America, can become toxic very, very quickly.

The Punisher has been a symbol of white, male violence for a very long time. The Punisher skull being coopted by actual US troops and police officers has been going on long before the Netflix show, long before The Punisher was ever on my radar. It’s been going on since he first stepped into comics, because he represents the ultimate power fantasy for these kinds of people.

He represents a distinctly male, distinctly American fantasy; if someone pisses me, off, I get to kill them. Cop or not, legal or not, fair or not, I get to make the rules about how the world works, and if I don’t like something, I get to kill it. That’s the ultimate power fantasy for so many of these people, and especially for white supremacists, violent cops and soldiers, who get into these jobs not to serve, protect, or allow peace to prosper, but to assert themselves as the dominant force and make others submit to their will by threat of force, or, worse yet, to fulfill their desire to hurt and harm, to kill, and to oppress.

No amount of reclaiming can ever really take what The Punisher stands for out of the hands of N*zis, cops, or the military, because he represents what many of these people aspire to be: a violent force above and outside the law, irreproachable. 

His skull being a dogwhistle between cops that they accept and encourage a level of targeted violence towards “the enemy” isn’t an accident. It’s a product of what The Punisher narrative always has been.

So, to that extent, I think it’s, frankly, kind of impossible to really “reclaim” The Punisher when he, himself, is the idealized form of these hate groups. He is the unimpeachable killer. He is his own lawmaker. And these cops, these N*zis, they use him for a reason. 

The closest I saw a narrative ever come to being able to reclaim Frank was Season Two of Daredevil. It really recalibrated the concept of the Punisher and put him in a finite cage, a space of operation; his war wouldn’t be endless or indiscriminate. It was targeted at a specific group of criminals, who were not chosen by race or creed or anything else, only by their specific actions in correlation to Frank. It framed him as a failure of society to protect the vulnerable, and as the frightening extreme of vigilantism; he was not a hero or a villain, but a man in the middle, as equally inclined to protection as he was to savagery. 

But they threw all that shit away the moment they allowed him to befriend an actual fucking N*zi in Season Two of Punisher. Any growth he had, any constraints, any hope for change, any understanding that nowadays, in an America ripped apart by white supremacy, gun violence, and extralegal violence, the Punisher was no longer a welcome narrative, was all flushed down the toilet.

Season Two ends with him shooting up a locked room of brown teenage-looking criminals.

It speaks for itself.

He has such a long-standing history of violence that trying to coopt him to represent peace, to represent protection? I dunno.

I believe it’s done in good faith, I do; I believe the artist has the best intentions and can, and should, try to wrest his creation from the hands of monsters. He can and should say “my creation is not for you, my art is not for you, and my character despises you”. That’s a right move. That’s good.

Donating to BLM charities is absolutely good, as well! And seeing that he wants his character to represent equal justice and a protection for the oppressed is good.

But this shit is coded into the very DNA of Punisher, at this point. It’s in the genetic makeup of his stories, his canon, his past. While it may not have been intended by the creator, this character has been in the hands of so many writers and artists who have molded Frank into the ultimate symbol of violent supremacy, of lone wolf shoot-’em-up vigilantism, that original intent seems... moot.

I don’t know if you can take the evil out of The Punisher when it was intentionally written in there in the first place.

We don’t need any more “antiheroes”, in my opinion, at this cultural moment. We are suffering enough. We do not need any more white men with guns taking the law into their own hands. We do not need any more “questionably moral” men. We do not need any more shooters. We do not need any more violence. 

We need to glorify and uplift the voices of the marginalized. We need to romanticize protection, kindness, empathy, strength, and courage. And I don’t think The Punisher can be a frontline voice of that.

At the very least, the utter bottom line, I’ll say this; it is very good to see them saying “Frank is not for you, you monsters”. That’s good. Take away everything N*zis like. Rip it away from them. Remind them they aren’t wanted, aren’t accepted, and don’t get to pretend their participation is normalized. They are to be cast out, called out, and rejected from every single thing they like. Shove it down their throats that they aren’t liked by anyone. 

It is very good to see this artist using his position to support an important movement and to donate to it using an incredibly recognizable symbol and one of the most popular media characters of all time. 

I wholeheartedly support that.

But there will always be a stain in Punisher. There will always be a cloud hanging over it. His story is a story that brings with it the baggage of male violence, white violence, gun violence, vigilante violence. The violence of people who believe they get to decide who lives and who dies. The people who believe they get to decide whose life matters.

And I don’t think that’s going to change.

There’s obviously a lot to say about, like, fanon interpretation, personal reclamation, personal enjoyment, etc., but this is where I stand on the issue of The Punisher as a large media presence, and with regards to my personal politics. 

I also want to add that this is not a personal indictment of anyone who enjoys the Punisher shows or comics or Frank as a character. I totally am aware that people can be politically active, thoughtful, and aware of the media they ingest and its political implications and still like characters like Frank for a variety of personal reasons. 

Still, I think it’s important to discuss these topics and to ask people to be mindful of what they engage with, how they engage with it, and what they support; everything has meaning. Every work of media, every character. And it’s our jobs to look at those works and characters and assess what’s going on with them, what our support of those things mean, and to what degree we engage with them. It means something.

Whew! That was a long one. But I hope it answered your question!