Richard Marcil

>He is almost gone but will not forgotten.

>Reagan the symbol of something, depends on who is using what to bolster whatever it is they want to rationalize, is difficult to remember.

>Reagan’s image may have survived because his years in the White House were viewed within a range of acceptably Presidential, Trump, in that sense, may be different.

this is why god created editors.

Wow, really? It seems to me that this article provides no compelling evidence that Batman actually has depression. I’m afraid the author has confused grief (a temporary state) with depression (a chronic one).

What depressive symptoms does Batman demonstrate? Does he try or threaten to kill himself? Does he have difficulty remembering things or making decisions? Does he feel hopeless to the point of inactivity and demonstrate a lack of motivation? No. On the contrary, Batman is totally driven and committed to his mission of ridding Gotham of criminals.

Some people do spiral into depression when faced with trauma. Others are more resilient. Batman clearly falls into the latter category.

And the article totally crumbles at the end. The conclusion is just all over the place. For instance, where the author earlier asserted that following Todd’s death, “The light for Batman, and his saving grace, became his faith in those he loved,” he seems to reverse course in the conclusion and says Batman “couldn’t handle losing a son.” Which is it?

I also don’t understand how Batman demonstrates that “we can find methods to cope with our grief.” The author suggests that the only coping mechanism Batman employs is sublimation.

And finally, there’s this corkscrew at the end: “ultimately we will meet a roadblock that derails us faster than we can recover. These coping strategies may end up dooming us as we struggle to find normalcy in a chaotic world.” What in the world does that mean?

You obviously got more out of this article than I did. Can you explain any of this?

Wow, great point. Hadn’t thought of it that way before.

yikes. i have no clue what this article is about. is this author trying to say that this game, “mafia” influenced tarantino? or that the film resembles the game in some way? and if that’s so, then so what? there’s no coherent thesis here, just a lot of vague assertions.

Wait, Joker is a great villain because he “is very patriotic”?

…Really?

I also love how three of these points — ”There’s no method to his madness,” ”Joker does not need a plan to succeed,” and “Joker is unpredictable” — are literally synonymous.

This terrifically lazy writing.

“The Pokémon universe is very similar to the real world” — how? and what is “the Animals in Captivity Debate” anyway?

the Farfetch’d “pokedex entry suggests that it, “makes for a delicious meal,”and this has lead [sic] to it’s near extinction.” — how is this connected to the real world? are there people who refuse to eat pokemon in the pokemon world? are there people who don’t eat animals in the real world? are their reasons for doing so the same or different?

“It is here were [sic] Pokémon has been compared to “cock fighting,” and “dog fighting.” ” — would’ve been interested in hearing more on this.

this is by far the best article i’ve ever read on the artifice.

i’m confused. first, the author says “Recently, influential director Hayao Miyazaki, made a claim that ‘anime was a mistake.'” then later, the author says “In truth, this quote has been created to generalize what Miyazaki stated in early 2014.” by whom has it “been created”? towards the end of the article, the author refers again to “Miyazaki’s statement.” did miyazaki say “anime was a mistake” or not?

i’m also interested in the alleged “wide variety of responses for[sic] anime fans and detractors alike.” what responses did this quote/non-quote meet with?