American Sniper and the Hero Myth

image_pdfimage_print

American Sniper, a new film based on the book of the same name, is being released on Christmas Day. Directed by Clint Eastwood and starring and produced by Bradley Cooper, it tells the story of Navy SEAL super-sniper Chris Kyle, widely-praised as the most lethal sniper in American history with at least 160 “official” kills, and apparently many more “unofficial” ones. The film’s catch phrase is “the most lethal sniper in history”, and the trailer shows Bradley Cooper undergoing a moment of moral doubt before (presumably) shooting a child carrying a bomb. The Hollywood studio is banking not only on the film’s popularity, but that Americans will want to spend their Christmas Day watching such morally questionable lethality. The trailer immediately reminds me of another Bradley Cooper role in The Place Beyond the Pines (a much better movie than American Sniper, by the way), where Cooper’s entire character is built around the fact that he killed a man with a young son the same age as his own and felt guilt and regret for the rest of his life.
Digression about the title American Sniper: why are there so many films beginning with “American” something or other? Cooper has already starred in one such movie only a year earlier than this one (American Hustle), and then we have American Psycho, American Beauty, American Pie, American Gangster, American History X, American Outlaws, and many, many  more. I understand that the double iambic rhythm of America’s adjectival form lends an especially strong sound that leads to strong titles, and it is hard to find any other nationality adjectives which convey such emphasis (the few scattered examples are exotic rather than emphatic: The French Connection, The Italian Job, The English Patient, The African Queen, The Manchurian Candidate, The Good German. Even here we see the definite article almost without exception, which is never necessary with “American”). Rather than exotic, titles beginning with “American” are meant to be paradigmatic of something true and universal and worthy of such a phonologically forceful appellation. We can speculate that Kyle, in choosing the title for his war memoirs, intended to tap into this paradigm with himself representing the ideal Platonic form of “sniper” or “killer” by means of his qualitative Americanness. It is beyond doubt that director Clint Eastwood and the Hollywood producers agreed.

Moving back to the original story, after 10 years in the military and four tours in Iraq, the real-life Chris Kyle left the Navy in 2009 and started a private security consulting firm in his home state of Texas. One of his priorities was supporting wounded and troubled veterans. When his book was published, he donated the entire $1.5 million check to charities supporting such veterans. He was a devoted family man as well as a noted gun-lover and hunter (it remains unclear whether he killed more human or non-human animals).

Kyle, along with a friend, was killed in 2013 by a troubled ex-Marine who shot him in the back when Kyle took him for his own brand of “therapy” at a shooting range. The funeral was held at the Cowboys Stadium in Dallas to accommodate the huge number of mourners. This man was a hero to millions of people in America. My purpose is not to disrespect Kyle in any way, but to point out some of my thoughts and observations about the circumstances which lead him to become such a hero to so many.

It is obvious that Kyle was a conflicted individual, which is perfectly understandable if we consider the inhuman amount of death and bloodshed he was involved in. Many veterans return from war with PTSD, often despite never even firing a shot or being shot at. War is traumatic, and the training and mindset that prepares an individual for war can sometimes be even more dehumanizing. I recognize the goodwill Kyle felt towards other veterans, but should it be considered the wisest decision to bring a suicidal, mentally-unstable veteran whom you had never met to a shooting range? Kyle’s death, while tragic, is not surprising. Jesus Christ reportedly said “live by the sword, die by the sword”. Kyle, a lover of guns, personally killed hundreds of humans with guns. Is it shocking that such a story should end in his own death by gun? Kyle was also a proud Christian man who must have fallen into confusion about the meaning of his Lord’s words extolling pacifism. He had more of a mentally of Crusader-against-the-infidel Christian than a turn-the-other-cheek one. Yet this is beside the point as he was not the first man to justify his violence through his religious beliefs, and he won’t be the last.

Another relevant thing I found out is that Kyle never expressed any regret or doubt over killing people on such a Herculean scale (here is a quote from his book: “It was my duty to shoot, and I don’t regret it. The woman was already dead. I was just making sure she didn’t take any Marines with her.”). One must imagine that it would become quite routine after a while to aim, shoot, and repeat. This is no video game, however, nor is it aerial bombing, artillery, or even run-of-the-mill machine-gun fire. Every one of those kills Kyle would have previously and skillfully planned, calculated, and then witnessed in gory detail by means of a powerful telescope sight. That such a thing would be desensitizing is understandable. I would not take such a job, but if it were me I would also by necessity strengthen my personal convictions about my own righteousness if only as a way to avoid insanity (another quote from the book: “My shots saved several Americans, whose lives were clearly worth more than that woman’s twisted soul. I can stand before God with a clear conscience about doing my job.”).

There appear to be some unsavory parts of Kyle’s story. First of all, I must ask myself why Navy SEALs and other special operations guys call themselves “silent professionals” when there is nothing silent about the stream of lucrative book deals and Hollywood productions involving former Navy SEALs and their ilk telling all the dirty secrets about their work (which is to say, how efficient they are at killing other humans). Kyle’s book and movie are just one of an entire sub-genre which the French philosopher Jean Beaudrillard would label “war porn”, and its popularity in the military and American society as a whole is revealing. Just as in similarly violent video games, the wide-eyed reader/viewer can excitedly imagine himself killing everybody in sight and single-handedly saving the day/winning the war. Such a mindset, while quite common, is psychologically unhealthy for individuals, and politically unhealthy for a democracy.

Kyle also had problems telling the truth. Though apparently no stranger to garden-variety barroom brawls, he invented a story about a bar fight in which he punched out former wrestler, actor, and Minnesota governor (and fellow Navy commando) Jesse Ventura. Ventura sued and was eventually awarded over a million dollars in damages. Kyle also apparently made up a story about killing two guys who tried to rob him somewhere in Texas, which never happened in real life. I wonder why he would feel the need to make up superfluous falsehoods when he was already well-supplied with enough martial anecdotes to win admiration from his armed acolytes. It reeks of the braggadocio and machismo that is all-too-common in the special operations communities. He was also a heavy drinker, like many fellow veterans. Alcohol is one of the most common and most readily available means for veterans to cope with the trauma of war and homecoming. Sadly, we should not be surprised by such a man leading a violent life, even if he is by no means alone.

The idea of the Hero is one that is as old as humanity, and well-documented in the ancient stories of Heracles and Achilles on down the line. Thomas Carlyle famously popularized a theory of hero worship whose exemplars were nevertheless praised as much for their cultural and literary feats as for their martial and political prowess. Likewise, we will not find today’s ersatz heroes in the pages of Nietzsche, whose morally-transcendent, classically-trained heroes would come to rule over the common rabble. The current American myth of the hero is not so sophisticated as its predecessors, whatever their flaws. If we think about Joseph Campbell’s  famous theory of the monomyth, Chris Kyle could, through the narrative of his book and the film, be seen to follow the universal mythical paradigm of departure, initiation, and return. The thing about Campbell’s theory, though, is that it applies to the myths that human societies create, but not to human societies and individuals themselves. In other words, we create the myths that we want to believe. The myth of Chris Kyle and the hero protecting their freedom from evil-doers is one which many Americans would like to believe.

Like I said, Kyle, for all his personal problems, is not himself the problem, but a symptom of a larger problem. He was just doing his job, as horrible as that job was. The real problem is with the segment of society that glorifies this behavior as heroic, holding up Kyle in particular as a super-hero. I think it is twisted logic that holds up people like Kyle, and soldiers in general, as heroes while failing to question the cause or need for war and violence in the first place. In fact, if it has not been clearly enunciated up to this point, I do not care much at all for the term “hero”. Heroes are for people who see the world as black and white, good guys and bad guys, us versus them, without much thought for nuance or second-order effects (another telling quote from the book: “Savage, despicable evil. That’s what we were fighting in Iraq. That’s why a lot of people, myself included, called the enemy “savages.” There really was no other way to describe what we encountered there.”). I think it is no coincidence that super-hero movies are especially popular at the moment–the desire for super-heroes in adults comes from the same line of thinking, and the same weakness of critical thinking, that produces hero worship. This same line of thinking also enables the propaganda and social and political environment which facilitates war and stifles dissent against it.

Chris Kyle was no super-hero, let alone hero, though many people (and maybe he himself) saw him as one. The world needs neither fake heroes nor mythical super-heroes with super-human powers or super-human killing ability to be able to solve the world’s problems or kill all of the bad guys. The society that produced Chris Kyle and his unquestioning world view will sustain itself with tales of heroes like Chris Kyle who defend our “freedom” from the bad guys. The thing about bad guys is that, to them, the other guys are bad guys, and they are fighting for their own version of “freedom”. Killing over 200 “bad guys” is just as ineffective a way to peace or freedom as killing two million “bad guys” if there is no reason why and no plan to stop killing them. This false heroism creates more problems than it solves and multiplies the violence in the world. Chris Kyle did not protect or make anyone safer; his story is one small part of immoral (and probably illegal) war that has only increased the vicious cycle of violent retribution that exists in the world. Such a cycle will continue until someone, dare I say one akin to a real “hero”, tries to stop the cycle with understanding, dialogue, and diplomacy. The world does not need heroes; it needs human solidarity.

Liked it? Take a second to support Wrath-Bearing Tree on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!

David James

David James served as a Fire Support Officer in the 173d Airborne in Afghanistan from 2005-2006 and 2007-2008. He now teaches History in Italy where he lives with his wife and twin daughters. His hobbies include reading, writing, and rock climbing. He agrees with Borges that "reading is an activity subsequent to writing: more resigned, more civil, more intellectual".

37 Comments
  1. While I do agree that often troops are treated as heroes and that a large portion of America worships them for just doing their job. I do not think that Christ or the Bible extols true pacifism. While the Bible is clear about being passive when being persecuted for Christ’s sake it also says to ‘defend the poor and fatherless’ and extols those who “break the teeth of the wicked’ I would also remind you that when the centurion asks how to be saved becoming passive and leaving his job for the Roman Government was not mentioned.
    I also think that while each side may view the other as the ‘bad guy’ one side will almost always be the side that is fighting for what is actually just or closer to Just. Some wars have no ‘good guys’ but most wars do have a genuine ‘bad guy’ or two and some have ‘good guys’. There is usually a side in war that when the other refers to them as barbaric it is a true statement.
    Something that would probably help this article is if you were to describe what a hero actually is, that would give people a basis to understand why Christ Kyle was not a hero and why most soldier are not heroes. It would also help people to recognize when they have actually been blessed enough to meet a hero.

    1. Thanks for reading and participating, Brian. Your comments are appreciated. I suppose when it really comes down to it, the pacifism or non-pacifism of Jesus is open to interpretation, just as most of the New Testament is. I tend to find more value in the Sermon on the Mount than the scene with the money-changers or occasional opaque quotes about “breaking teeth”.You have a point about good guys versus bad guys. It is likely that in many conflicts we could determine who is “more” right without much problem. This raises another question, though, of what the other side thinks–obviously they think they are right, too. If one side happens to label the other as bad guys, terrorists, barbarians, Huns, or Japs really makes no difference, since opposing sides always insult each other and engage in propaganda. That doesn’t mean that it is always true.
      I tried to make it clear from the article that I was skeptical of the very idea of heroism, though in my last paragraph, and especially final two sentences, I expressed an opinion about what someone close to a hero could be in my opinion. Thanks again and take care.

  2. That’s funny. My Bible tells me that Christ violently drove the money changers from the Temple with righteous anger. You must be picking and choosing verses. Poor form and worse scholarship.

    1. Thanks for reading and contributing your opinion, Joe. I find that the New Testament is largely open to interpretation–your Jesus is something like Samuel L. Jackson from Pulp Fiction; mine is more peaceful. We can’t help but pick and choose. Thanks again.

      1. As an avid Bible reader with a masters degree, I think the problem is individual verses corporate or national. The Bible does teach pacifism in terms of how an individual responds to threats and violence yet that nations are to defend themselves and their land. Christ cleansing the Temple should not be used as a validation of war or violence. His cleansing the Temple was to show His deity and disdain for improper worship that was due Him. People worshipped Christ several times in the NT. The temple cleansing is to show the here and now importance of purity and the future symbolism that He owns the temple. It is His house and will be in the eschaton. All this to say, if someone slaps you, turn the other cheek. If your nation is attacked, defend and hold responsible the specific nation or people who attacked you. Love the blog but sometimes you argue too much of what shouldn’t be without putting enough emphasis of what needs to be. I love the writing, nuance and critcal thinking employed.

  3. Tremendous essay, David.
    My favorite line:

    “The thing about bad guys is that, to them, the other guys are bad guys, and they are fighting for their own version of “freedom”

    At least a few among the hoardes of people that Chris shot probably viewed themselves as hero’s, too.

    1. Thanks for your comment, Brian. I think you are probably correct in imagining some of the victims to also be heroes in their own minds. I certainly would think so about suicide bombers as well, as horrific as that is. Once again, violence and false heroism begets more of the same.

  4. I am a retired Army officer with combat service in the Gulf War (Desert Sheild/Storm) and the Iraq War (OIF), as well as service in Haiti. For the most part i served with conventional infantry units, but i deployed to OIF with Joint (meaning all service) Special Operations Forces in a support role.
    Over the last several years, the military has been using the term ‘warrior’ vs soldier, which is disturbing. Warriors make war for glory, personal gain, and the love of fighting. Soldiers reluctantly wage war to protect their nation, and do it legally and ethically with the minimum amount of violence and destruction necessary. No doubt, soldiers are human and make mistakes and horrible decisions, but there is a fundamental difference.

    The SEALS seem to attract the warrior type vs the soldier type. In my experience the SEALS were most inclined to use a direct approach, and their planning for operations was woefully inadequate because of their delusional overconfidence. While Army and other conventional and special operations forces at least recognized the need to establish a rapport with the people, the SEALS stayed very polarized in their good/bad view of the world. This may be due tonthe fact that they deployed for 90 to 180 days, living on a FOB with no interaction with the locals until they went out at night for raids on ‘targets’. Read Marcus Luttrells books. They are full of sophmoric and ignorant views of the conflict, grossly false and racist assertions about Islam and the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. Luttrell asserts in his book that the team debated and finally votednon killing unarmed civilians- clearly a war crime. This was glossed over in the movie, but it is either a flat out lie or a shockings view of how these guys think. No ‘hero’ would have even considered killing a civilian in that setting.

    1. Thank you for your comments and added perspective. I completely agree with you about the warrior emphasis, which was always hard for me to tolerate when I looked at the soldiers around me, or imagined the state of the US military as a whole. Calling everyone and everything associated with the US military “warrior” and “heroic” is another example of euphemistic language. I don’t know much about Luttrell and didn’t see his movie, but I take your word for it, and I agree with your sentiment about SEALS, as I mentioned with Kyle. Thanks again.

  5. Well done. Thank you.
    I’ve been working on a book for several years that stems from the story of my grandfather, a posthumous Medal of Honor recipient killed in the battle of Tarawa in WWII.

    The bizarre transformation of the meaning and use of “hero,” and the juvenile tendency of post 9/11 America to think in terms of comic-book morality—with us or against us, “evil,” bad guys and so on—are part of the book.

    Again, thanks for this essay. The link is to a long essay, adapted from an early version of a chapter in my book.

    http://contraryperspective.com/2014/08/12/calling-the-troops-heroes-is-a-lie-that-puts-them-and-democracy-in-danger/

  6. Those that put everything on the line, including their innocent view of humanity, are happy to fight for the freedom and safety you have in which to write such un-researched and unsubstantiated drivel 🙂

    1. Thanks for your comment, Mark. One of the purposes of this blog is that we have all fought for the freedom you reference, but certainly do not have an innocent view of anything. I appreciate the value judgment you offer on my writing, but I can assure you that it was researched enough to get the factual substance correct. If you have a more specific point of difference we would be happy to hear it.

        1. There happens to be a book that has been out for several years which the film is based on, and which I referenced. Actually, if you read the article, the premise is about the portrayal and self-portrayal of Kyle and how that relates to American society more than about the actual film, its presumed “realism” or entertainment value, or the trailer alone.

      1. In addition, diplomacy (the answer you suggest) does not work with all cultures. You seem to be unable to recognize that from time to time in history (and the process repeats over and over), an organization comes along that wants to see the entire world embrace their way of life, their ideals, and their tyranny and those that don’t are cast into war. Would diplomacy have worked in 1939?
        The beauty of being American or citizen of another free country is the freedom to deviate from dogma, or an oppressive ideal, without fear of retribution.

        1. No offense, Mark, but it seems like you are showing some of that innocent view of humanity yourself. I do recognize that diplomacy is not a universal panacea, but I think there are better results when it is exhausted before any military action. That is not related to my overall point though. Military action is easier to initiate when large numbers of people subscribe to a militarized mentality and the hero myth which I discuss.

  7. David,I read the entire article and I must say I have a more biased perspective because my brother is a Marine and served in Iraq and Afghanistan. I read both American Sniper and the Lone Survivor that someone else brought into the comments earlier. My view of hero does not come from killing other people. This part of the military actually makes me uneasy even though I am a firm supporter of them. I think my view of hero comes from the sacrifice that is made by these individuals. They sacrifice so much of their lives for patriotism. And while I know people join the military for many reasons I believe that they truly feel called to give back to their country. My brother sacrificed family and career to serve. He now has severe PTSD and has difficulty functioning on a day to day basis. He fell into the typical alcoholic behavior that many other veterans fall into. He doesn’t know how to cope with living after war and since I have seen how he has returned , I understand why so many veterans are suicidal. I watched our family as many other families constantly wonder and worry about their family member and would they ever see him or her again. I saved every letter from him in case it would be the last one. I see the sacrifice from soldiers and their families and I can’t help but feel in debt to them.
    In terms of why Kyle would take a soldier with PTSD to a gun range, it has been shown to be therapeutic. It can give them some sense of normalcy and can open up conversation and trust. My brother struggles hugely with who he can trust and does not open up. I wish he would find someone who could help him work through his issues in some way shape or form (Believe me he has tried many things). The gun range works with some not with all. I have seen my brother flip out at a movie, at certain smells, at certain times of year because it brings him back. So I must say even though I appreciate where you are coming from, I will forever be grateful for people like my brother and Chris Kyle because I do not even want to try and imagine what they had to endure.

    1. Jen, thank you for your comments. I’m sorry to hear about your brother and have seen other cases like this as well. I don’t know whether or not shooting guns has been shown to be therapeutic, but I do not that it is still a loud and violent act that could always do just as much harm as good (see the case of Chris Kyle). My own suggestion and solution is to go with groups of people into nature, especially mountains, hiking and camping. I think it is a true therapy for everyone, and a great way for troubled people to find peace, get exercise, and maybe get more perspective. It is happens to be similar to military training because you have to carry everything and do everything yourself in an outdoor environment. Thanks again and good luck.

  8. I have to admit I’m very torn on the Jesse Ventura lawsuit. I’m from Minnesota so I know that Jesse Ventura is a loud mouthed fool in so many ways. But no one who is against the lawsuit has ever said what THEY would do if someone made up a story about them that was as bad as being a UDT guy who said he was glad US seals died.
    I saw that Jake Tapper (a guy who gets off on thanking the troops every 10 minutes) was ripping into Jesse for the lawsuit. And all I could think was, god I hate Ventura, but what if someone wrote a book saying Tapper said that US journalists deserved to lose a few covering our wars. I bet he would have CNN’s lawyers destroy that person. But since it happened to a jackass like Venura by a war Hero like Kyle, it becomes a story where the narrative was more important that the truth. (just like with Rolling Stone’s UVA bombshell story).

    Makes me question what newscaster think should matter more in stories, narratives or facts. And it seems like narratives are winning out.

    1. Thanks for the comment, Drew. I think you are entirely right that narratives created by the media are more accessible than the truth. What we are trying to do here is talk about things in a truthful way, but with our own perspective on things. In the article I tried to explain exactly why I don’t think Kyle is a hero and why the whole hero narrative itself is something artificial in present American society.

  9. I met a few guys like Kyle in Iraq, some active duty, some contractors.
    Guys who had killed a lot.

    One time, a rather short, swarthy guy wearing 5.11 trousers, a green t-shirt and an M9 just started telling me and a National Guardsman stories while we were waiting for a gate to be opened to the Palace.

    One story was about riding around in Iraqi civilian clothes on motorbikes to shoot people on “the black list.”

    He also said he had ridden on a camel to reach insurgents on “the black list” and kill them out in the desert.

    Could have been BS, but I thought he was just trying to get something out.

    I wonder what those guys are going to do with the rest of their lives.

  10. Yet another leftist with the same “war is horror” opinion that we’ve all heard since the late 60’s. Congratulations on perpetuating this stereotype. Perhaps the context is lost on me in this quote: “Chris Kyle did not protect or make anyone safer” however it occurs to me that in the most trivial of forms, he did, indeed protect American lives at the very instance that the improvised bomb was traveling in their direction. Death and murder should always be a last resort but when one is forced into reasoning with the unreasonable that have motives solely inspired by fundamentalist religious beliefs, I would say that there are those that step to the front and volunteer their lives. Maybe we are irresponsible to use the term “hero” but to say this man was misguided or there is some copacetic cosmic meaning to his demise because he died by the gun is jarring and incendiary.

    1. Thanks for the comment, but maybe you should think about your own stereotypes. Truly a shallow comment on your part, from your accusation that I am a “leftist” because I don’t automatically glorify war, to the fact that it is I who am perpetuating stereotypes “from the ’60’s” by saying such things. I didn’t realize war was always universally loved and approved by everyone, except for a brief decade in which the “leftists” appeared. Chris Kyle was also a fundamental religious fanatic who loved death and murder, so he was no different from his victims on that score. And also, if it is jarring and incendiary to say the truth, I am happy to say it: this man was misguided, and there definitely was a larger meaning to his violent death (which was one of the points of my article). At least you realize the context was lost on you. Thanks for reading, anyway.

  11. I’m sorry, but you are so interested in being open minded you have crossed the line to empty headed. Yes, people generally see themselves as the heroes of their own lives. Bad guys consider themselves to be the “good guys”. However, that doesn’t take away from the fact that some of them are indeed evil.
    AQI did (and does) murder children. Not “stop this child from throwing a grenade” or “there were children in the room when we cleared it”, but walking into households and shooting infants in the head. Using kitchen knives to slowly decapitate 4 year old girls. True, vile, unadulterated evil. Ignoring that fact does nothing to make you more compassionate. Christ did not display his compassion by remaining willfully ignorant of evil, and promised harsh retribution for evil of that kind.

    There are heroes, and Chris Kyle was one of them. Being a hero doesn’t require perfection, or even close to it, which is where people like you fail in your understanding. Whatever faults he had, he was willing to put himself forward in defense of others, and to pay the spiritual, mental, and physical price demanded.

    1. Thanks for the comment, Aaron, but I disagree with most of what you said except for one thing: “a hero doesn’t require perfection.” That is obvious, but it doesn’t mean Kyle is one. I think you are rather more empty-headed than you accuse me of being with your simplistic perspective.

  12. “why are there so many films beginning with “American” something or other?”
    “titles beginning with “American” are meant to be paradigmatic of something true and universal and worthy of such a phonologically forceful appellation.”

    You answered your question three sentences later.

  13. “First of all, I must ask myself why Navy SEALs and other special operations guys call themselves “silent professionals” when there is nothing silent about the stream of lucrative book deals and Hollywood productions involving former Navy SEALs”
    You know why. When they are out on missions, they are professionals and they do their work silently, which is why they are special ops.

    You can’t take a description about someone’s job or how they do their job and then apply it to the rest of their life. A plumber does dirty work, so does that mean they are dirty people both physically and morally when they are not working? No.

    1. Nice try, William, but “silent” and “professional” are supposed to mean that those secret “black ops” guys are not supposed to talk about who and how many people they assassinate under Uncle Sam’s orders. Money talks, though, and they can’t help themselves.

  14. The real Myth is that the USA can continue to indefinitely operate an international war-time footing using completely “volunteer” military forces. I advocate bringing back the “selective service” draft (like in the Viet Nam War) and thus making all of its citizens either direct or indirect participants in the military operations and ultimate costs of war. To continue these solely “volunteer” USA military forces is to invite only a self-selected few citizens to participate while leaving the rest of us to view war through the selective eyes of mass media and self-serving corporate and government interests. I maintain that most wars and military conflicts would be less damaging (both financially, physically and morally) and would also be shorter in duration if the military draft was reinstated. I believe that the US Congress and the President are utterly delinquent in not requiring all of its citizens to be participants in its wars and military conflicts via a Selective Service System military draft.

    1. Thanks for that, Thomas. I think you may be on to something. If not mandatory military service, I think there should at least be some sort of required public service, just as in many countries in Europe.

  15. He didn’t donate 1.5 mil. He donated some, then was killed. His wife hadn’t donated more by the time of the trial because she said she had not had the time to start the nonprofit necessary. Please check your facts. With such a touchy subject it is even more important that written words are accurate.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Support Wrath-Bearing Tree on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!