Frank Tieri Apologizes For Insults and Threats Aimed at Critic Bemoaning Dan Panosian’s Defense of His ‘Female Furies’ Cover

Frank Tieri Apologizes For Insults and Threats Aimed at Critic Bemoaning Dan Panosian’s Defense of His ‘Female Furies’ Cover

Comic book writer Frank Tieri took to Twitter to apologize for his insults and threats aimed at a critic and fan

Last Thursday, Claire Napier made a post to her Twitter account concerning her opinion on the cover for DC’s Female Furies #2, drawn by Irredeemable artist and Slots creator Dan Panosian:

I don’t think Panosian’s cover sells today’s Female Furies well — claire “😱” napier (@illusClaire) March 6, 2019

Napier, the former Features Editor and Editor-in-Chief at Women Write About Comics and editor of the award-winning graphic novel Finding Home, took issue with the lines-of-sight featured on the cover, as she perceived that these lines-of-sight were awkwardly focused:

Why be this foolish? I just don’t know, I don’t get it. The comic is good; this is mining below it pic.twitter.com/98NAC6FbiB — claire “😱” napier (@illusClaire) March 6, 2019

The Female Furies mini-series paints a very progressive history of Granny Goodness and her Female Furies during their time on Apokolips. The mini-series features questionable writing choices, such as turning Darkseid into a #MeToo-style sexual predator and depicting the culture of Apokolips as one that boasts a hilariously straw-man-esque patriarchal power structure, which have left many fans divided on their opinions. Though the merits of the book and the story choices are a separate topic, Napier is providing her criticism through the lens of the actual story being told, hence her discomfort with the focus on a female character’s pelvic area.

Napier’s criticism soon drew a response from Panosian himself, who refuted her diagram with his own interpretation of the lines-of-sight:

It’s all a matter of perspective and how you wish to view the world I suppose. pic.twitter.com/uPpH0DsUiq — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

A back–and–forth between Napier and Panosian followed, with Napier detailing her issues with Panosian’s work while Panosian defended the cover:

I’m just defending my artistic choices… Hopefully informing of my intentions. You’re obviously free to interpret anything however you choose. But at least now you know where I was coming from. — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

it’s really cool how you’re totally uninterested in my artistic evaluation but p darn keen on me acknowledging yours! — claire “😱” napier (@illusClaire) March 7, 2019

It’s interesting enough that I provided my perspective on the topic. It’s not a personal attack but your responses seem to insinuate you’re offended that I would bother to explain my intentions. I’m sorry you disliked it so much. Peace. — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

what do you think about my perspective. What do you think is incorrect about the eyelines i have drawn on your cover? — claire “😱” napier (@illusClaire) March 7, 2019

It’s one way of looking at it certainly. Personally I feel the lines I drew incorporate character sight lines as well. But it’s all in the eyes of the beholder. I get that. I just wanted to let you know I wasn’t intentionally doing something like that. — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

If they incorporate sight lines “as well” then you’re getting my gist, that the cooch strap is also a subject of compositional focus, yeah? The thing I’d like to say, /since you’re here/, is “look out for that in future, avoid it”😐👍 — claire “😱” napier (@illusClaire) March 7, 2019

It is at this point in the exchange that Panosian begins to grow increasingly defensive over his work, downplaying his compositional work to place the blame on the costume itself:

Interesting way to describe a costume aspect I didn’t design – but okay, I’ll try to be more aware of composition choices. — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

gosh!! You didn’t design it; I know this. Did you draw it? Yes. Did you arrange it on the page? Yes. You have the responsibility for HOW you present the elements you are hired TO present. I’m saying “uh have you considered this aspect of presentation…” — claire “😱” napier (@illusClaire) March 7, 2019

you’re saying “definitely not!! and that’s a good thing!!”

My friend, it is not a good thing. It’s a lapse. It doesn’t sell the comic well. 🤷‍♀️ — claire “😱” napier (@illusClaire) March 7, 2019

At this point, it appears that Napier struck a chord, as Panosian insulted Napier’s own work as he attempted to exit the conversation:

Typically artists, out of respect, don’t go online and critique the work of others in the same field. I took a look at your work and I might “suggest” you spend more time learning to draw and less time criticizing others. Good luck. — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

This response by Panosian sparked a wave of criticism against the artist, who believed his comment was inappropriate and done for no other reason than to bully Napier. The outrage would lead Panosian to publicly apologize via his Twitter account:

There’s a tacit understanding among all artists that you don’t publicly critique another artist’s work. If you’re a critic, that’s one thing. But if you’re a critic and you make comics, you’re also an artist. You can’t have it both ways. [1 of 6] — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

If I engage with a critic, I’m always polite. No critic is “wrong”. All of it is opinions. Including mine. I don’t generally respond to negative critics. When the criticism is valid -it’s a learning opportunity. [ 2 of 6 ] — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

But I don’t subscribe to the notion that an artist or writer must remain silent if their work is misunderstood or maligned. An artist or writer has as much of a right to express their voice/response as the critic. [ 3 of 6 ] — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

When I do respond, I choose to be polite and fair. If a critic is rude to me, I still try to be polite. If that same critic is also an artist, big or small, I feel they they should be open to a taste of their own medicine. [4 of 6 ] — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

Either stick to one or the other, otherwise – it’s simply not fair. For instance, movie critics don’t generally make films, big or small. They critique films. If they do make films… They should be prepared for critiques. [ 5 of 6 ] — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

On a side note- if you feel the opposite – that’s fine too. Follow your heart – just be fair about it and, ideally, polite. — Dan Panosian (@urbanbarbarian) March 7, 2019

The responses to Panosian’s apology were varied. Some felt that the apology was disingenuous, and that Panosian had not actually apologized for his unwarranted attitude towards Napier. Others, including comic industry professionals such as Sean Gordon Murphy, Donny Cates, and Billy Tucci stood in defense of Panosian’s actions, painting Napier as a petulant child and Panosian as a true professional.

Of the many who were criticizing Panosian’s apology and actions, critic Marc-Oliver Frisch found himself the target of the ire of Harley Quinn writer Frank Tieri. Frisch had joined the conversation by chastising Panosian for not only vanity searching for himself, but then responding to criticism with insults:

Typically artists, out of all sorts of reasons including but not limited to “respect,” don’t go online ego-searching their name to start arguing with critics. And that’s before we get to the petty insults part. Apologize and do better. — Marc-Oliver Frisch (@knallkultur) March 7, 2019

Frisch would then respond to Tieri’s support of Panosian’s apology with an insult (Frisch would later admit that his ““shitheels” tweet certainly wasn’t the best way to start the conversation”):

Why, it must be Shitheel Thursday at Team Comics Central. https://t.co/cwDD8ppgIv — Marc-Oliver Frisch (@knallkultur) March 7, 2019

Frisch’s insult and participation in the conversation surrounding Panosian were the catalyst for an explosive outburst from Tieri, who proceeded to swear profusely at Frisch while also insulting him and threatening him with physical violence (the tweets have since been deleted by Tieri, but have been recovered through archival screenshots):

Though the deletion of these tweets by Tieri has led to the full context of the conversation being lost, Frisch’s account still hosts his tweets towards Tieri, which appear to show that Frisch, while combative, never escalated his rhetoric and language to the unprofessional levels displayed by Tieri:

Tieri’s rage was not limited only towards Frisch. During Tieri’s outburst, former Image Comics Branding Manager and current VIZ Media editor David Brothers offered his opinion on Tieri’s behavior:

Here’s a comics writer that’s so desperate to prove his manhood and superiority over someone else that he’s threatening violence. Imagine having such cowardice rooted so deep in your soul.

Don’t allow this.https://t.co/dUzUFhIqUB — d a v i d. (@hermanos) March 9, 2019

Rich Johnston got punched at an NYCC by a comics writer once. He took it on the chin and didn’t snitch. But maybe in 2019 we should try harder to sweep these bad actors off the board — d a v i d. (@hermanos) March 9, 2019

I mean, threatening someone you know lives thousands of miles away is selling wolf tickets to me, but what do I know? Maybe this 48 year old man is really out in these Brooklyn streets, knocking out whoever crosses him like he 16 again. Bet not, though. Sounds like a pose to me — d a v i d. (@hermanos) March 9, 2019

If one of my friends called his self defending me by threatening to beat up strangers, I’d cut him all the way out my circle. I’m a grown man and I don’t need that energy. Police your own before somebody does it for you. It’s 2019, y’all. Do better. — d a v i d. (@hermanos) March 9, 2019

In response, Tieri lashed out at Brothers, extending the “same invite I gave [to Frisch]”, to “do it at a con or in a parking lot” to Brothers

However, Frisch would elaborate on his alleged history with Tieri and clarify the extent to which they were in contact:

The “history” Frank Tieri now claims he and I have is that I used to write about U.S. comics, in particular a column about DC Comics sales for @comixace. Tieri wrote comics for DC during that stretch, so I’m sure those came up, but that’s the extent of my “history” with him. — Marc-Oliver Frisch (@knallkultur) March 9, 2019

For my part, for what it’s worth, I don’t remember what those comics were, let alone what I wrote about them 10 years ago or however long it was. But it wasn’t unusual for creators to freak out about the column back then, so it didn’t surprise me Tieri was pne of them, evidently. — Marc-Oliver Frisch (@knallkultur) March 9, 2019

Okay, this is coming from @bleedingcool and @RichJohnston, apparently. So, once again: The extent of my “history” with Frank Tieri is that I used to write more frequently about U.S. comics, which he appeared to remember me for. No other “history” with him, personal or otherwise. pic.twitter.com/PQlaJ2WAzV — Marc-Oliver Frisch (@knallkultur) March 11, 2019

Ultimately, Tieri would delete all tweets related to his aggressive outburst, issuing an apology for the episode via Twitter:

In regards to recent events… pic.twitter.com/yFubyP77C9 — Frank Tieri (@FrankTieri) March 10, 2019

(Visited 1,985 times, 1 visits today)