top of page


Barbie is of the moment, she´s in the news, which motivates me to write about my own version of the concept, namely, the character my comic features.

Dolls in the shape of idealized representations of the female form are among the oldest works of art. These very "immodest Venus", with their exaggerated sexual features, attest to just how far back this ever-so-dreadful phenomenon "objectification of women" dates.

It forces the brain-burdened among us to confront the fact that if we are to condemn stylized depictions of sexually alluring females as "Evil" we must condemn the entire human race.

I don´t want to condemn, I want to exalt, I want to celebrate, I want to EMPHASIZE. Case in point, Barbie.

My Barbie, IN HELL´s Barbie.

I wrote this short text introducing her for the Kickstarter´s promotional campaign, perhaps you remember it:

BARBIE (the blonde)

"A cheerfully childish cheerleader. Joy incarnate, bubblegum princess, always the heart of the party. Her body, a palace crowned with two emerald jewels; windows into a tender soul of pure, innocent, effervescent affirmation. Her heart; a blooming flower."






Is there room, is there need in the world for a character defined by such words?

Recently, a couple of important details concerning Barbie´s "super form" came to me. In her super form, Barbie will be a spring, an immobile spring. I felt like I had bumped into proper divinity, I was moved by my discovery.

People fail to realize; passive heroines are the way they are because the story they inhabit seeks to emphasize their intrinsic value. Intrinsic value is passive value. A heroine defined by action would, like a man, always be in danger of failure, and thus in danger of becoming worthless (a fear well-known to all men). Passive heroines, object-heroines are immune to this sort of thing.

Can you fathom why such a character would be desired/crafted by mankind?

21 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page