Well, certainly by Republican standards, Achilles is not a rapist.
The issue ends with him, dressed as a female, forcing himself on a girl. They’re presumably about thirteen. Between him and Paris, Shanower seems to be implying men’s errors tend to be due to desire for women (in Paris’s case, Helen). I imagine it’s in the source material too, but it’s sort of boring.
Besides Achilles being a rapist and still being a hero, the issue’s excellent. Shanower goes all over the place with the story, lots of different characters, all of them properly identified so one isn’t trying to discern identity from appearance. The war is building up.
Again, there really isn’t much humanity to the story. Achilles’s friend (or girlfriend or victim) is about the only one who gets any non-melodramatic, event moments. She gets a couple panels.
It’s a wonderful exercise. The question is, of what?
Leave a Reply