My Photo


Roll Call

Become a Fan

« Less human than human. | Main | The gold's gonna be good. »

Monday, 24 October 2011


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Holy Terror, Frank Miller!:


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Perhaps Miller, Dave Sim, and David Mamet can form a support group for people whose talents were ruined by conservative ideology.

Karl Steel

Perhaps Miller, Dave Sim, and David Mamet can form a support group for people whose talents were ruined by conservative ideology.

Adam Kaiserman

Although I would love to see WWBD bracelets for popular consumption, I think you're conflating Miller with the character of Batman a little too much. Post-WWII depictions of the character are very clear that the character does not use guns.

I also think that Miller's work has always betrayed a conservative ideology. The Dark Knight Returns might have made fun of Reagan as a symbol of authority and a dunce, but its libertarian politics were within the Goldwater branch of the Republican party.


Adam: Sure, but DKR also had the Sons of Batman as an example of the excesses of vigilante id, along with some actually well-voiced rule-of-law critiques of Batman (though the book clearly ends up on Batman's side). Is there a similar check on the bloodthirst of Holy Terror? That's what I take Scott to be critiquing, not just the conservatism in general. (See the Martha Washington books for more examples of conservatism--in that case Objectivism--ruining a Frank Miller product, and 300--which is basically fascistic--as another example of a conservative comic that still works.)

james suhr

I think Miller's views have less to do with a national look on how to steer the country and handle international policy, and more to do with Frank Miller being just cranky, old, and lacking in any emotional and intellectual maturity past that of the age of 16. While I have enjoyed some of his work in the past, I always leave the challenge and thought of this: If Frank Miller is so great of a writer, why hasn't he ever written (or drawn) a female character as anything more than a 14 year old male's fantasy? His women are either conflicting with the male, just to arouse him as a tease, or they are there basically pumping up how great the male character is... only to have both, archetypes of women to end up having sex with the main male character--or to be drawn in sexually suggestive pose.

Christian von Schack

James: In case you haven't seen it already, this will hopefully delight you as it did me:

Adam Kaiserman

I'm not going to defend Miller's depiction of women in any of his recent work. It's all been pretty bad. Looking at Sin City it occurred to me that all his female characters are either hookers, strippers, or dead. Tomenos has mentioned Martha Washington as a project ruined by Objectivism, but that aside, I think it also presents Washington as a strong female presence. It's been a while since I've read it, but I don't remember her being overtly sexualized. I'm open to being proven wrong, however.


I was just reading this discussion of Miller's recent anti-OWS screed (it's just what you'd imagine) on Metafilter, and this comment made me think of your blog. What do you think? Have we all been giving Miller's work on Batman (and, presumably, Daredevil and others) too charitable a reading?


The Guardian Books blog has a link both to Miller's stuff and to some of the other responses to it. You can find it here:

The comments to this entry are closed.