Talk:Punisher

If you are an avid Punisher fan, you can add the following userbox on your userpage: {{User:Bloodpack/Punisher fan}}

💀 This user is a certified Punisher fan!

Mass murderer? or primal warrior

With violent tenacity, someone(s) keeps trying to get the Punisher listed in the "serial killer" or "mass murderer" category (with connotations of Jeffrey Dahmer, Ed Gein, etc.) when such a categorization is psychologically idiotic. Modern day "demo-liberal" postmodernist Westerners, accustomed to a softening, bureaucratic, techno-oriented lifestyle, apparently have lost all sense of what warriorhood means. Lexi Alexander's interviewed American soldier above clearly didn't think the Punisher was a serial killer, but a noble warrior. Castle clearly has a conscience (the root motive of his helping others by violence), but a conscience untroubled by modern liberalist progressivist hysteria; like an ancient knight, Castle senses the theological dualism between Good and Evil and has no socialistic heart-burn over the rights of aggressors. It makes as much sense to label Castle a serial killer or mass murderer as it does Achilles or Lancelot. Study the medieval romances involving Lancelot, Arthur, etc., and they are filled with "just" private warfare, rolling heads, strewn brains, gushing bowels, etc. The violent knighthood of the Middle Ages, and its psychology of personal vengeance and custom of "just" private battle, is where Castle finds his home. Castle's character is a forceful re-emergence of more ancient concepts of warriorhood, and it is the height of liberal-modernist-progressivist arrogance to simplistically mis-diagnose this more primordial species of warriorhood as "serial killer sociopathy".

The above is not said to justify each and every morally ambiguous action of Castle but to indicate the right psychological approach to be taken in dealing with an "atavistic" character like the Punisher. Applying our liberal-humanism-derived concepts of justice and criminology is simply irrelevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.131.147 (talk) 11:56, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

This is the right approach as far as we are considered "creator X says in a reliable source that he's a mass murderer", "the publishers say in their own material, he's a mass murderer" - that's the start and end of it. You raise many interesting points (leaving aside the political bias and slams you put in there) but the bottom line is that wikipedia is not about truth, it's about verification. --Cameron Scott (talk) 16:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

"...Heroic outlaw traditions and the values embedded in them may have provided a kind of cultural script that advocated a moral system alternative to, and higher than, official law (compare this to Seal 1996, 17-18, 182-3 and 190)...."

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2386/is_2_111/ai_69202442/pg_18 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.183.203 (talk) 14:58, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

seealso:

http://www.cambridge.org/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=0521856809 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.172.110 (talk) 07:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

When someone starts throwing labels such as "demo-liberal postmodernist Westerners, accustomed to a softening, bureaucratic, techno-oriented lifestyle", then we're no longer talking about editing the encyclopedia article of a fictional character, but pursuing a political agenda. Cameron Scott is correct in that mass murderer is the term that the characters' creators/owners use, and while a section on the character's psychology could, for example, quote essayists or social scientists regarding other aspects, the creators/owners' characterization must be the primary foundation. And please sign your posts; it's trolling not to.--Tenebrae (talk) 19:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Frank David Castiglione name

Francis "Frank" David Castiglione is his birth name but when did he changed it to Frank Castle and more importantly why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbritp (talk • contribs) 00:56, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

The reason The Punisher changed is name is to be able to go do a second turn in Vietnam. So he enrolled with the false name of Frank Castle. Between is second and third turn in Vietnam he legally changed is name to Frank Castle and went again in Vietnam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.235.57.3 (talk) 10:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

MAX

Should the MAX imprint section be split off to Alternate versions of the Punisher? The above discussion (and The Punisher: Frank Castle) is pretty clear that this isn't the main Marvel Universe character. (Emperor (talk) 04:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC))

We just need a cite or three that it is out of continuity. Lots42 (talk) 12:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

With Marvel MAX I think it is safe to assume it isn't in continuity unless someone says it is - that is what would need proving. (Emperor (talk) 14:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC))

With respect, I don't think it's safe to assume that. That is all. Lots42 (talk) 02:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

It needs to be proved that its in continuity.

1.Almost no Marvel Characters appear. 2.Nick Fury is a COMPLETLY DIFFERENT CHARACTER. 3.Certain characters are dead in on series alive in another e.g. Jigsaw. 4.His body count is stated as 2000 in max but there is a 616 even where he takes out 2000 in one sitting. Its no more canon then War Machine Max. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.178.227 (talk) 22:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

In Punisher #5 which was released today, writer Rick Remender finally put this debate to rest in the letters section. He explicitly stated that MAX is not in 616 continuity. Here is the whole quote, "Let me make this very clear and concrete: PUNISHER MAX IS NOT REGULAR MARVEL CONTINUITY. Seriously, It is a different, and quite filthy, universe. In MAX town Frank is an older man, there aren't any magic crystals lying around and people use cocaine for sugar." FearEmbodied (talk) 23:56, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Target: Anti-Venom

In Anti-Venom's spin-off comic series, Punisher decides to bring Eddie Brock to "justice". (Although... Why now? Eddie's been a cannibalistic alien hybrid with a sense of justice just as warped as Castle's for years. Shouldn't he be going after Gargan, who's a cannibalistic alien hybrid with no sense of justice? I guess it's more of a plot twist thing; now that Eddie's trying to reverse the damage he'd done as Venom, Castle comes along and says. "Hey, you're that Eddie Brock guy... you used to kill criminals just like I do, and eat their brains, so I'm going to kill you."