I did not mean to imply that writing an entertaining Punisher run should be "easy." I meant that any professional writer who thought it was "too hard" to do should be fired from writing. I get that there's a challenge to writing a character with no permanent relationships and no life outside of killing people. But that challenge should be within the ability of anyone with enough writing ability to get paid to write.
Berserkfury819 wrote:But to call him a madman implies a degree of insanity, ala Norman Osborn or someone else. I get that you probably wouldn't like the character because killing criminals is all he does. But speaking as someone who has a read a ton of Punisher comics, he's not a madman. He always has plan, a backup plan, and a back up back up plan. I'd argue the only hero who is probably more crazy prepared than the Punisher is Batman.
I don't think I agree with your definition of what a "madman" is. It seems like you think "madman" implies some sort of mental handicap that prevents one from accomplishing his goals. There are plenty of people throughout history and in fiction who qualify as madmen but are nonetheless super-effective at planning and executing their goals. The holocaust, Soviet Russia, 9/11 . . . all the work of madmen who nonetheless had the ability to plan and execute their mad schemes with an unfortunate degree of success. I'm not saying Frank Castle is like any of those, but it does cast doubt on whether that definition of "madman" really holds up.
I don't know whether the Punisher is a madman. He is not mentally handicapped or delusional. In his own universe, where he is incapable of making mistakes or errors in judgment, maybe what he does is even laudable. Someone like the Punisher, if he existed in the real world, would certainly be a madman given that no human is really that infallible.
