Between the 1960s and the 1980s, Americans' priorities shifted from a patriotic concern for the well-being of the country to a concern for personal progress. “A 1980 study by UCLA and the American Council on Education indicated that freshmen were more interested in status, power and money than at any time in the past 15 years . Business management was the most popular major” (Whitley). Similarly, in the graphic novel Sin City written by Frank Miller, wealth, power, and status play an important role in the outcome and setting of the book. The main character, Marv, is a strong and lonely man who has a personal vendetta against the most powerful man in Sin City, Cardinal Roark. Miller highlights the culturally prevalent desire for power, status, and wealth that emerged in the late 1970s. The purpose of this book is to show its readers, adults of the 1990s, what kinds of mistakes and mistakes corruption occurred in the generation before them. He does this by portraying wealthy characters as all-powerful, exposing the environment brought about by an unequal distribution of wealth, and he uses Marv as a character the audience can identify with. Although it's a cliché, "being drunk with power" can be true. to its meaning, because people in power can act in completely foolish ways. Based on information provided to readers by Marv, Cardinal Roark is publicly known as a man of God, a war hero, a philanthropist, an educator, and the most powerful man in the state (Miller). Marv believes he is the most powerful man in the state because he has the ability to bring down mayors and elect the governor of his choice. Whatever definition of “power” a person may believe, it is a fact that access to power comes through wealth. Roark is a m...... middle of paper...... warns them about their future in the financial market. Even though Miller wrote this novel in 1991 based on the trends of the 1980s, the graphic novel is still relevant today. In fact, the distribution is even more unequal than it was 20 years ago. “In 2007, the richest 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all private wealth, and the next 19% (the executive, professional and small business stratum) held 50%. 5%, meaning that only 20% of the population owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the poorest 80% (wage workers)” (Domhoff). These data show that we should be extremely concerned about the changing distribution of wealth in the United States. A more equitable distribution is healthy for the average citizen because it allows us to thrive in an environment that provides us with more opportunities to advance in economic society..