Did Merlin Exist?

The Wise Old Man, Magician and Sage?

Magic is Madness

5 to 6 min read

Don't you just love the madness and magic of Merlin? What d'ya mean, no? He's only the grandaddy of all sorcerers, the one and only true archetypal wizard, the wild man of prophecy. Okay, you get the message. He has so many presentations, but, his history is primarily arcane! 

Merlin is fittingly portrayed as a feared druid and a crazy old oracle to the Britons of Dumnonia in Bernard Cornwell's Warlord Chronicles. This is a romantic figure glorifying a lost mysterious celtic way of life. Of course, it's doubtful a man matching our modern vision of Merlin has ever existed; history doesn't always meet our expectations.

'I believe the Gods hate to be bored, so I do my best to amuse them. That way they smile on me. Your God,’ Merlin said sourly, ‘despises amusement, demanding grovelling worship instead. He must be a very sorry creature' 

Bernard Cornwell, The Winter King

I love Merlins origin as a real living druid, or a bard, maybe a madman from our Romano-British period. It was Geoffrey of Monmouth who fictionalised Merlin with the trappings of wizardry in modern fantasy. It's almost always conflict that teases out names of potential interest. 

The fifth and sixth centuries were supposedly war ridden. Other sources disagree, promoting a cultural integration. In the east and the south, Germanic Tribes who we call Anglo-Saxons founded their kingdoms. Some Britons resisted in the west and north, they also fought themselves—others assimilated into the Germanic way of life. 

 

In popular media, Merlin is often a priceless asset to Arthur and his followers, because of his magical prowess, and foresight—the guy was even a Disney cartoon. In reality, though, there isn't any evidence to suggest such he met Arthur! All sources for Merlin come from written sources post 12th century, but we know some are supposedly copies of 10th century manuscripts. They were written hundreds of years after the early Anglo-Saxon events.

Romano-British Crown and Diadem: Norfolk

Be that as it is, I still like Merlin's defiance; it endures and not just against the Germanic invaders or Mordred's ambitions, but his stubborn defiance toward Derfel and Arthur. The semi demented wizard can appear quite vulnerable, but secretly he's deceptively sharp minded because his personality and charisma make you forget he is a magician of sorts. I am going on about Bernard Cornwell again my sweet potato. 

In earlier Welsh manuscripts, like the 'The Red Book of Hergest' and 'The Black Book of Carmarthen' Merlin, written up as 'Myrddin Emrys,' 'Wyllt or Merlinus Caledonensis,' which really isn't resonating our prime 'Sword in the Stone' bearded bloke, but instead a crazy bard and prophet, with a sound knowledge of nature. Well, that's what it says it those old writings. 

After a major loss during the battle of Arthuret, Carlisle. This particular Myrddin (Merlin, born circa 540) went bonkers! The poor bugger ran away into the forest where he lived as a wild man, a bit like John the Baptist. He was a Bard, just beneath Druid for Britons. I have no idea if Myrddin would have retained some social significance or if he became a spectacle. 

The contradictions that define modern against the proto-Merlin's tell me there was historical inspiration for medieval historical fiction writers like Monmouth. I've barely touched the surface. Other Merlin names from records are:

1. Ambrosius

2. Emrys

3. Myrddin

4. Merlinus

5. Merdinus

6. Merdinn

7. Merlin Ambrosius

8. Merlin Caledonensis

9. Merlin Silvestris

10. Merlinus Arturius

To Conclude... 

Even if this compelling character never existed at all, the stories that surround him bring our attention to the historical context of those times: like the Germanic tribes hunger for territory, for instance, supernatural thinking, Celtic in-fighting and warrior culture, religious tension, Irish piracy and of course Vortigern. For me, personally, Geoffrey of Monmouth's development of Merlin, and his other heroes are his zeitgeist. 

Gandalf is comparable to Merlin, from Tolkien's legendarium, whose name was taken from the Völuspá of the Poetic Edda's. Above all, Gandalf is a reinvigoration himself, a modern shape shifted expression of the old one eyed runemaster, Odin, the wanderer and prime god of the vikings. It all blurs together to entertain our modern ignorance; that young 'Merlin TV Show' back in the day with Victor sodding Mildrew and 15th century plate armour proves my point. We really don't care—play dress up and pretend. It's all good. 

Arthurian characters have had their fair share of reboots and retcons; the wild man Myrddin, Derfel the warrior and, the warlord, Arthur; they've all differed over the centuries. We may never uncover an exact history. It's up to us as individuals to make up our own minds. 

A Heart Breaking Televised Show

The latest depiction of Merlin in the recent Winter King TV show was black. Of course discontent rained down across review websites—an ancient black celtic druid in semi historical fiction is impossible. Why? The decades of training, the extensive perilous travel, language barriers, Druids were drawn from celtic tribes. It's as wrong as having a German bloke as Moses. Of course, Cornwell and supporters of the casting choice forwarded their case that the Winter King took place very shortly after the Romans returned to Rome. 

While it is a respectable theory that people of colour may have been serving in Roman ranks, the timing is off. Rome, including Merlins forfather left in 410 CE to defend Rome. The Winter King was is set in the latter part of the fifth century continuing into the sixth, which is generations later. There would be generations of breeding before Merlin was born! With Rome a century gone the wizard would have been a white haired celt. Clearly the reasoning fails, leaving little doubt that the casting was bending the knee to inclusivity politics and wokism. We really don't care. 

The evidence proving the presence of African or Sub-Saharan Roman soldiers isn't strong—yet, this doesn't mean they did not exist. Bede, Gildas and Tacitus are highly sourced historical writers who Bernard Cornwall must have used to shape, The Winter King. Maybe my research skills are bad, but I couldn't find anything in these sources online or in my own books to directly support black roman soldiers. I am happy to assume they existed, but Europe was mostly conquered and recruited into Rome. We don't tend to give a monkeys uncle because if it's a fun show, what else matters? 

This avenue doesn't need to be explored, Bernard Cornwell portrayed Merlin traditionally in print, but then, sold the character off, which is what good authors are supposed to do, to be fair. The most disappointing thing is the insensitivity of Merlin's Roman ancestry given Rome massacred all the druids at Anglesey; all knowledge of Druidic Celtic Briton was taken from us. The Romans oppressed us and publicly violated Boudicca's daughters, beating and whipping her after forcing her to watch. Druidry will always be mysticised because of this massacre. The political posturing and woke attitudes show double standards. 

Bernard Cornwell's literature based Merlin, from the Warlord Saga is a thoughtful portrait on multiple layers; a man trying to restore the lost old ways. We hold biblical scripture very dearly, but this setting is centuries more recent, it echoes biblical issues of Rome and oppression on our own British ancestors. Merlin the symbol of Druidry carried loss, and struggled within his political, social, and religious landscape. He stubbornly battled against Saxons and Christians alike.The Winter King televised series should not have disrespected our spilt ancestral blood and tears for equality.

What Are Cartoon Archetypes?

Do Cartoons Use Archetypes to Reflect Society?
Do Stereotypes Enhance or Diminish Cartoon Quality?

4 to 6 min read

Well, hello there! Today I came across an interesting blog by Annie Weatherwax about archetypes in relation to illustrations and cartoons. This piece grabbed my attention, given my own, previous blog on archetypes and, uh, well—I like to dabble with cartoons.





With regards to a lot of media, especially cartoons, creative people automatically use archetypes. If we get scientific about it, could we say archetyping has always been our natural way of nailing people down? Take the archetypal doting mother; it could only have been accepted as a 'thing' after people had spoken about the 'those types' of mothers who excessively nurture. We've been tokening archetypes over our history. I've probably missed something somewhere, but cartoons do play on them.

Why Are Archetypes Important in Cartoons?

Before a psychiatrist brands a patient with a mental condition, many of the DSM-V boxes will need ticking first. Cartoonist's draw up illustrations based on archetypes, and stereotypes. New archetypes have to be recognised, and then tokened as a 'human thing' before it goes viral, like with the modern 'Katen,' or those overly 'analytical atheist' types, for example. It's swings and roundabouts. Capturing the essence of people's behaviour.




What Makes a Compelling Character Relatable Beyond Their Archetype?
Hold on, uh, don't think I'm saying all cartoonists are mentally ill. A few of us are quite normal. I'm just saying there're other tantalizing things to incorporate into your work other than an archetypal model. I'll admit to gladly enjoying cheeky stereotypes and vulgarity when I do a cartoon. Parody is another word for it, according to the great Instagram. I might try a touch of satire, in all fairness, I only tend to do gag cartoons.

Understanding the Collective Unconscious in Art

Annie's blog explains Jungian prototypes very well, but I'm not of the initiated, I view what Jung called the 'collective unconscious' in a different way to how he did. I see the collective unconscious in the same light as I see human morality: without mystery; socially constructed and existing in the human mind and accepted as some inherent nature when it's not. Cross pollination of culture could also explain aspects of the collective unconcious, historically spreading deep symbolic themes and values across the world.



When I create a cartoon, I find amusement in emphasising societies common forms of ugliness, our dibshittery. I try to promote our lack of grace, the human screwball scramble. It can be a challenge to accurately turn my stupid mental imagery into an picture.

What Happens When You Create Art Without Archetypes?

My previous blog about archetypes agrees that they are exaggerated, but compelling characters that re-incarnate that punch of character inspiration. I posited the idea that we, as people, do the same. Almost every boy, years ago, wanted to be Han Solo. I saw many of them modify their behaviour to mirror that lovable rogue. Well, before Star Wars, those qualities were recognised by George Lucas in Errol Flynn, James Dean and Humphrey Bogart. They shaped Han Solo. My friends who practiced the Han Solo swagger, were unknowingly strutting like James Dean. Okay, so did I!




All that caricaturing; mannerisms, villainous squints, the intense stare, tough guy side glances, the put-on manly voice, all these idiosyncrasies that personify our character development aren't archetypes themselves. Wallace and Gromit wordlessly purvey inner thought very well. Wallace has many archetypes but his soul comes from how he carries them.


We enjoy artistic content when there is something that resonates with us, it's immersive. I believe artistry is not simply relatability alone or indeed, solely archetypes, but rather how they are brought to life. We gauge our environment going on how relatable things are for us. Wallace is a loveable waffling character: a genius inventor, typical English man, but only because it's how he is animated, designed, postured, voiced and facially expressed. This artistry is key above all else, but that's only my opinion.




For The Sake of Your Sanity I'll Stop!
I appeal to Caravaggio's powerful art. His work will grasp the viewer, because of that very realistic human physiology. Those composed scenes of drama and tragedy. His art is pure immersion, because he put meat on the bone, then gave it emotion. I like to try and do a stupid-ass version of that.




Most art based on humans naturally contains something archetypal, the challenge may be to try one without any archetype or stereotype, just to see how weird and wonderful your cartoons can be.

Saint Derfel

The Legend of King Arthur: Derfel Cadarn. 

Celtic Britons

3 to 4 min read

While I was reading about the intimidating nature of Derfel Cadarn, I couldn't help but notice his immense power in the various poems and annales—he fought the Anglo-Saxons in Edinburgh and across England and Wales. He was a renowned man; a man who serves as the central character in Bernard Cornwell's Warlord Chronicles. Though a work of fiction, it's based on historical events from the British wars fending off the Germanic influx of invaders. Derfel Cadarn is rightly portrayed as an exceptionally skilled and courageous fighter. This led me to wonder about the true identity of the historical figure behind the character, Saint Derfel, and what we might glean from that era.

I found a man called Saint Derfel who lived in Wales during the 6th century. He was highly revered by the Catholic Church. Prior to his priesthood, he was likely a trained warrior, which is what Cornwell's book focuses on. After the great Roman departure from Celtic Britain, Roman culture remained somewhat, but the old tribal tensions returned, and territorial dispute fragmented the land. War was everywhere. Irish pirates, Picts, Saxons and neighbouring tribes. 

Derfel was a proficient and fierce fighter who led a troop of his own. However, he was not only proficient at killing, but also extremely loyal and honourable to King Arthur. What sets him apart is that he encompasses dual qualities, being both a warrior and later, a priest, a hero and a sinner. This combination makes him a compelling character, and on that, I recommend reading the Winter King by Bernard Cornwell.

It is true, Derfel Cadarn is associated with King Arthur in legend, but it is unclear whether he actually fought alongside any King Arthur-like figure back in those ancient times. That being said, sources still mention Derfel Cadarn as being with the legendary Arthur himself. I would have been terrified to fight alongside these men; hearing the dying broadcast their agonising pleas to their gods, haunting the crimson battlefield. They expected all men to fight and few survived to see their twilight years. 

Consider, the Triad of Welsh Tales and Legends of Medieval Wales, De Feuer (Derfel) is mentioned as one of the 'three best knights in Arthur's court'. The 7th-century Welsh epic 'Y Gododdin' celebrates Derfel as a warrior who fought alongside other heroes at the Battle of Catret, including Gwavrdur, a possible pre-curse of todays legendary King Arthur. However, we cannot prove Gwawrddur is really King Arthur. In later Welsh writing, Derfel is a close confidant of Arthur, and is centred within numerous of Arthur's battles.

Discerning fact from fiction is very difficult. Are these stories based on any particular historical truth? People may claim these legends come from pure mythology—what inspires our mythology? Marching directly into a fight with hordes of murderous, Germanic invaders, who were militarily superior? It seemed like imminent death, near suicide, but these resilient Romano-Celtic Britons used strategy and terrified them. After the Anglo-Saxon loss at the Battle of Badon, the invaders kept away from the Britons decades. 

In the Winter King, Derfel's story is about bravery, loyalty and honour during challenging times. This all had a significant impact on everyone's lives. During the Celtic wars against the invading Anglo-Saxons, individuals such as Derfel Cadarn emerged as true examples on how to take the fight to the invaders.

Is DC's Cyborg Rubbish?

The Cybernetic Outcast: A Symbol for the Futurist

3 to 4 min read

Victor Stone, the Cyborg, always comes across as a bit of a miserable bastard because he is, literally, the internet on legs. To be realistic just trying to log on to my bank is a right pain in the arse! Could you imagine all the popups and ads this bloke must get when he's just trying to buy himself a new waterproof coat? Yes, he's science and technology incarnate, but is that necessarily as glorious as they try to make it seem? If he already is the symbol of what we are becoming his head must be so Tik Tok sodden, Pornhubbed up to the temporal lobes, 4channed to the point of social media psychosis. Yes, he may well be beyond GCHQ, Mossad, MI6 and every other secret service, but this bloke'll be taking more pop-ups than anyone: constant invitations to try male enhancing pills, personality quizzes and not to mention years worth videos showing imbeciles punching each other in the crown jewels, because that's the internet! All that nasty porn and the onlyfans flirts — this man has no cock or bollocks! No wonder he's packing disappointment.

In those shit Justice League films, and the improved Snyder cut offering, we understandably see Cyborg struggle. Come on? he's not just adapting to his cybernetic enhancements, but having to come to terms with the obvious, a truth even Wonder Woman avoided like the plague. Just showing a bit of effort to fight for the greater good is pretty outstanding for anyone in his situation. He is a great example of the estranged outcast, self-ostracised or the proverbial lone wolf, but he is primarily emasculated, but we all ignore that! He tries, in the Justice League films to make bonds with Flash and Wonder woman somewhat, but not so much with Batman or Superman the most manly characters because of the risky banter, I guess. However, along with the man of Steel (a name that must add insult to injury) and Lantern, he can fly! Yes, we saw him weaponise his cybernetic body, turning his arm into a rifle, but not a fun gun. So bloody bleak.


In Teen Titans Go!, the series by Marv Wolfman and George Perez, Cyborg is quite funny! He's an animated singing and dancing, crime-fighting comedian, who loves pie! Totally different to the movie, as expected. I've watched hours of this show with our little ones, for me it's all about the caricatures, especially of Batman and Gordon, but I do like Beast Boy and Cyborg.

During the war with Darkseid, Cyborg and the rest of the Justice League, fought bravely. This other castrated comic version of Victor Stone was holding his own, then smash! I was quite surprised, I thought he was going to die! He took a nasty hit. The incident was also in the corresponding Justice League: War animated movie. I am glad he was added to the league roster, he works well but seems to be a tad bit of a token black guy? No? There's never any Kazakhstani superheroes either. Cyborg has become increasingly more popular over the last decade; he also appeared in the animated Justice League movies as well as the Doom Patrol show, which I was so tempted to watch but thought better of it and declined; he looked like a cosplayer on a cruel budget. The animated movie gave me diarrhea, well logorrhea, I couldn't stop ranting at the television. 



His tragic backstory in the comic books and cinema are slightly different. A horrible accident leaves him profoundly worse for wear and disabled. His life, however in the comic books, is saved by his father's proficiency with advanced technology, yes: his dad built the Cyborg.


The movies implementation of an advanced technological mother box from the planet Apokolypse is a great backstory. Superduper self-aware alien tech that merges with a eunuch, making a trans-human. I love it. The older comic versions hold little to no believability, but to say a single human created all of Victor Stones cybernetics means he retains his meat and two veg in one iteration, because in the accident he has his legs and wedding tackle in place. In print you can analyse these Stones more closely!


Speaking of performance, I've heard people say that Cyborg has always played an important role in the portrayal of disabled people in comics. No he hasn't! He can fly, and punch through walls, I promise you he would not qualify for personal independence payments or disability living allowance. His stories of adaptation and overcoming obstacles might resonate well with many readers but other characters do the same! I think Barbara Gordon is a better candidate for people with disabilities, given how she was shot and had to use a wheelchair for years!

The Problem with Hal Jordan as Green Lantern!

That Cringy Green Lantern You Want To See Fail! 

Hal Jordan, the fearsome Green Lantern of Sector 2814. 

4 min read

I've decided Hal is a bit of a bellend. One of those embarrassing characters who faces many challenges and setbacks, but still, always wins because the story writers have made him a 'Barry-Sue' is it or 'Marty Stu'? This is a man who soldiers on in his stories, and sometimes, you just want him to fail. A cheesy cock and predictable risk taker who has to overcome the toughest obstacles just to show you that determination means success. Isn't that a ball ache? That's him in a nutsack, a pointless Top Gun-esque maverick throwback who never moved on, but, surprisingly, he might grow on you because he carries the story. The character has blatant copy and paste attributes, but sometimes, I like the cheesy bastard! 

The Big Cheese

We can gather Jordan isn't as cool as any other lantern, because they're either more interesting than he is and modern, or simply fucking aliens. In fact, Hal Jordan is a gimmicky gonad of a guy! Look at these men I googled and see for yourself. Who plagiarised who here? Hal Jordan must be related to that resistance hero guy in the original 1983 television series, V. Look, it's a fucking Cheddar factory: 

It Has Something Beautiful

The Green Lantern Corps, on the other hand, is a collective force of bad-assery, and weirdness. It's under the leadership of ancient, blue coloured 'guardians.' Green Lanterns are super advanced space police of the DC Universe, empowered by rings of the highest technological advancements, that perfectly aid Lanterns who wear them. What a prick of a choice for a main character! The rings grant almost unlimited powers, limited only by the wearers imagination and will; they help protect the galaxy from all manner of threats. This is a fantastic premise that needs to be realised one day in a massive movie trilogy or TV series.

What makes the Corps unique is the diversity of its members; many originating from various world's across the universe, and possessing unique qualities. The diversity is wonderful, it works in a spectrum of life and dynamic relationships, one such member is the rough-hewn Kilowog, a monstrously pig-like Bolovaxian with the appearance of a pitbull, who took Jordan under his wing and bantered with him throughout the comic book series. They attempted to emulate this with the poorly received Ryan Reynolds Green Lantern movie. 

Where Lantern Fits In

Hal Jordan is saturated with will power because he is very determined, great. Of course, given his heroic stature there'll be no lack of unwavering dedication to protect the innocent and uphold justice—that stuff is just goes without saying. Hal Jordan is not an enjoyable comic character but maybe his past troubles added a little flavour to his graphic novels. A tad. Sorta. From the loss of his father to the destruction of his entire hometown, Coast City, this bloke has suffered many trials. Batman has an interesting role in The Sinistro War. Superman and Wonder woman make appearances in these pre-new 52 stories, but this is before Cyborg was in the Justice League and the Flash isn't important it's the story arc. I prefer these Geoff John's Lantern publications a New 52 or Rebirth alternative. 

Delicious Reads and Superb Powers

The ability to fly and to be shielded, as well as being able to wield such an extremely powerful ring. Jordan can fly across space. These are great qualities that he brings to the table. It might not be an intellectual read, but it's it's a tasty graphic novel! All those colourful, busy battle scenes are eye candy, beautiful. This striving hero is predictable for the reader but, I think it would be better if his friends, Kilowog, Guy Gardner and John Stewart saw him as a total p*nis. If he was a lone wolf, so to speak, it would be intolerable—teamwork, locations, enemies and characters make his comics good. 

These printed green lanterns can be more epic sci-fi than the earth based superhero stories. Opposing factions of lanterns fire projectiles that brutally kill their enemies, quite graphically at times. Limbs are lost and skulls cracked, we see innards. I don't know if it is my inner psychopath but, I like this sort of reality to this comic book war! 

Last Word On This

I've read the best of the Lanterns, enjoying Jordans legacy through the comic book masterpiece of Geoff Johns: I own the Eaglemoss version of the collection (above) it really is a daisy! I have a love hate with relationship with this. The contribution of other superheroes and characters improve it. I do find is easy to accept the 80s stereotypical white hero, but it has been improving in cartoons and such. So grab yourself a Geoff Johns from off the internet and enjoy paying tribute to one of DC's most beloved and enduring cheesy heroes, Hal Jordan!

Let me know in the comments what you think!

What Everyone Gets Wrong About Joan of Arc's 'Divine Mission'.

Joan of Arc: The Unseen Story Behind France’s Most Compelling Character

7 to 9 min read

Who was Joan of Arc?

Jeanne d'Arc, was born in the year 1412 in Domrémy, a village in north eastern France. Her father was Jacques d'Arc, a farmer, and Isabelle Romée. To English speakers she is known as Joan of Arc, and we might picture her in the same light as how the movies and entertainment might portray her: like a pious Wonder women, but raised on Catholicism instead of the old Greek gods. For all we know her personality might have been awful!

Joan grew up surrounded by a community that shared a dominant religious worldview, in a land of political unrest, which she would have accepted from a very young age. This fits my mental imagining of this highly religionised unlikely warrior woman. The key to her story however, was that she told people that she heard the voices of various saints urging her to help France in it's war against England. 

The Military Mind: Was Joan of Arc a Secret Strategist?

As a child I was told about this woman hearing voices speak to her and I believed she had something in common with Arkham Asylum patients. However, there is a gorgeous theory about her divine 'voices' impressively being put to political and strategical uses; a code to secretly communicate orders to their own troops! What has always been seen as Joan of Arc's unfaltering faith and self sacrificial stance with the English, may well have been the woman protecting a 'secret command' which was directed and inspired French resistance! For as we saw in Domrémy, God backed the French against the woeful English. So clever!

The Unstable Monarchy of Charles VI

The context of Joan of Arc's story is historical France, which was not very stable, much like it's Monarch, King Charles VI. Looking past the psychiatry he most likely grappled with a type of Schizoaffective disorder, an episodal condition which attacks both mood and thought. What a bloke, facing battles on so many fronts. The King's power was often delegated to his uncles and to his wife when he was down, so, he might have been more of an average bloke after all. 

Henry V and the Political Landscape of France

Henry V of England took advantage of Charle's mental illness and attacked aggressively, winning at Agincourt. Henry V invaded France and dominated; declaring himself successor to Charles who, was deemed illegitimate. The Treaty of Troyes stipulated that Henry's heirs would succeed him and in doing so, keep an English backside on the French Throne. There was a joint reign after both Charles VI and Henry V died. A dual monarchy of Charles VII and Henry VI. Isn't that crazy? 

Joan of Arc’s Call to Action

Eventually, we English, well the ancestors of the English, had taken most of Northern France. At this time, Joan of Arc, was a teenager and she told people that God had chosen her to save France; she convinced a nobleman, Robert de Baudricourt, to take her to see the King. Today, she'd be on a psychiatric ward with a dose of clozapine. 

Joan of Arc Meets Charles VII

In 1429, Joan of Arc met with Charles VII and managed to persuade him of her divine mission. This individual responded by granting the teenage girl a small army, a horse and armour. According to contemporary sources she rode into battle clad in armour carrying a banner! A very psychotic young lady. 

The Battle of Orléans: A Turning Point

In May, the same year, Joan of Arc was a respected leader of the French army; she led her men to victory at the Battle of Orléans, this was a major game changer in the Hundred Years' War! She won victories and people started to believe in her divine intervention (voices in her head), would have made her presence a token blessing from God to her superstitious  contemporaries. I imagine the morale of her men may well have soured, because people believed so much superstition and religion back then! 

Joan of Arc: A Teenage Patriot and Military Leader

Joan of Arc was pious, a teenage patriot and a resistance fighter, but above all, a strategical advisor to the top brass. Can you believe this sh*t? A child. Her presence bred mixed feelings within the French and English sides. Joan of Arc proved that a girl could do the most demanding work of any man in the middle ages. Society was patriarchal with roles specific for women, this young woman challenged the status quo. Dangerous thing to do in a world of thugs. 

Contemporary Accounts of Joan’s Appearance

There are quite a few contemporary accounts, especially letters, saying that she was of average height, which was just under five feet going on fifteenth century skeletal remains. She had dark hair and was slightly tanned and a strong woman; a great horse rider, attractive, but not pretty. 

Joan of Arc’s Capture and Trial

In 1430, the English captured the girl at the Battle of Compiègne and she ended up on trial by the Roman Catholic Church in Rouen; the charge was heresy of all things! Joan of Arc, had innocently gave herself to her religion, King and country. Iron willed, this catholic farmers daughter stood accused of crossdressing, not just some biblical sin, but doubtlessly a charge they conjured up to bring her down. Other so-called charges focused on her claims to hear divine voices and witchcraft; they claimed she was a threat to church authority. This religious moral inconsistency was a disgusting injustice. 

Joan of Arc’s Tragic Fate

Even though she persisted her innocent as they sadistically carried out their medieval torture; they still burnt her alive. It happened on May 30, 1431, in Rouen, she had only lived nineteen years. The triumph and glory of Joan of Arc was, arguably, the real trigger, that made miserable men jealous enough to conspire, and then murder this successful young mental female. Why you would betray a great military strategist for the sake of ego is beyond me. 

Joan of Arc: A Symbol of Injustice

Sadly, I can't speak highly of her unwavering faith, because from my perspective that nasty religion put her on the stake. Without a shadow of a doubt, I admire her defiance, grit and determination in the face of persecution, she seemed like a remarkable soul. On a more solemn note, this is a story of injustice, sexism, religious hypocrisy and political scum killing an innocent youth

Joan of Arc’s Enduring Legacy

This young woman became the enduring symbol of French nationalism and female empowerment. In 1920, Joan of Arc was canonized by the Catholic Church, which, I find to be an audacity after the faith initially betrayed her good graces. Today at least, she is rightly honoured by the people of France, those for whom she strived for all along. 

 

Is The New 52 Justice League a bit meh?

A Deep Dive Into The New 52 Justice League: What You Need to Know! 

4 to 6 min read

Alright, let’s talk about The New 52 Justice League. If you’re looking for the ultimate superhero team-up origin story, this is it. Volume 1 is not just well-written and beautifully illustrated; it’s packed with the excitement of characters meeting for the first time, which is an absolute joy for someone like me, a graphic novel fan in his forties!

This first Justice League book is a belter. Following my reading order, the next book is Barry Allen's flashpoint story arc which created this universe; he returns home at the end of the book and his costume and his memories begin to change too. It was clever how he is absorbed into the new 52 version.

After finishing this volume, I’m diving right into Barry Allen’s Flashpoint arc. That twist where he returns home, and everything about him starts changing—brilliant storytelling! 

The dialogue in Origins, Vol. 1 has a spark that jumps off the page, keeping me hooked. Honestly, it's weird how comics can deliver more action than films somehow. I guess it's the art and storytelling in sequences of orderly boxes that span through the pages!! 

After all those DC films crashed from that shitty Suicide Squad (cheers, Leto Joker) to the marmite-like mess of Batman vs. Superman, it’s been trial, but mostly error! Wonder Woman seemed to save the day initially, but even her sequel cause a global mexican wave of face-palming. Even Deadpool stopped doing DC jokes after that! Luckily, we still have some decent TV shows like The Flash. Fans should be paid to make the films. 

At least the 'The New 52' was an absolute dream. It had been around a bit before the DC movie disasters, but it was new to me, and it was an exciting new dimension for DC to re-invent all of its characters! I really hope they don't reintroduce underwear on the outside of the trousers again! In Origin, we see a brand new Superman, Batman, Wonder woman, Lantern, Cyborg, Aquaman and Flash. You can see its influence on the Justice League film, but better. 

That being said, it’s not all sunshine and rainbows, is it? Superman comes off a bit too cocky at times. It took a while for readers to warm up to him, he finds his footing. Green Lantern doesn’t quite shine like he did in the Blackest Night era, and Lobo? Total disaster.

One surprisingly engaging storyline was the Throne of Atlantis arc. It dives into a conflict between the surface world and Atlantis. I’m not buying into the whole Atlantis myth, but the world-building is solid, and it gives Aquaman some much-needed depth. It’s not just mindless reading; it adds layers to the characters and their struggles.

You can’t overlookTrinity War and the beautifully drawn Darkseid War that wrap up the Origins saga. Darkseid is a genuinely menacing big bad boss, and he makes the stakes feel real. I found myself pulled into the drama of DC’s universe, where danger is lurking around every corner. Truthfully, I confess, I have less enjoyable characters: Cyborg is the internet on legs, Shazam comics are just written for younger audiences, Aquaman is the fishguy outdone by his Atlantis context, Wonderwoman is eye candy with an unappealling backstory—there are many compelling characters in DC. 

Looking back, the biggest cringe was 'hero' and 'villain' speak that is throughout mainsyream comics. For example, whenever I read, 'I wanna be a hero, like you,'

          'But you cannot, you're a villain!' 

          'No, I am working with Barry to become a hero!' 

It minces at my janglers slightly. These so called heroes are all pretty much vigilantes working alongside or  against the law to fight crime! The hero jargon doesn't sit right. 'Gimme your bastard wallet! Now!!!,' imagine that. 'Come on, I'm an actual villain!!' It's quite silly. 

At least the heroes are flawed and relatable, which is what draws us in isn't it? At the core of every great superhero story is that fight for justice, but that’s not what keeps these stories enjoyable, it's the smacking the shit out of each other, the war and struggles. Deaths and wagimg who will beath who. Batman is the best. Legit. 

Now, if you check out the animated version of Origins, called War, well, let’s just say it's shit. Just read a graphic novel!

In the end, DC breathed new life into their universe with the New 52 because of the Batman and some of these Justice leagues. A comics, graphic novels or omnibus is a frozen moment of time, a slice of the DC cake preserved for you to consume. It never goes out of date. I recommend getting stuck in and then follow on into rebirth.