239: Batmanalyzed

[Allen Varney]

Batmanalyzed

Batman is one of the most fascinating, multifaceted superheroes in all of comics ... as long as you don't think about him too much. Allen Varney digs a bit too deeply into the Batman Mythos and unearths some rather unpleasant character traits in the process.

Read Full Article

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Yep. God forbid a marketable character like Two-Face or Robin gets killed off.

Commercialism will always limit the stories we can tell.

They'd never permanently kill off a major character...But can you imagine how gripping a scenario where Batman himself dies would be?

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Excellent article (Yes, I can speed read).

This is something like what I touched on in MovieBob's explanation of Spiderman. If you look too deep into a hero, you come up with an impossible man.

While the Alan Moore's and Frank Miller's (*spit*) of this world try to bring the man to the hero, I believe we really need to look to the hero of the man.

Batman is a legend, like Robin Hood, Dick Turpin, Paul Bunyan and even Abe Lincoln. It would be IMPOSSIBLE to do all the things they were supposed to, (Seriously, Lincoln may have been a great guy but still...) but that's not the point.

Like when Kirk's been batted across the mess room, or Lister's just eaten a Weevil Vindaloo, you KNOW that even if that would kill a normal man, these are HEROES.

If you define someone as a Hero, they don't go to the loo anymore (unless it's dramatically appropriate). They don't have that aching feeling first thing in the morning, they don't have to remember to buy milk on the way home.

They just Hero. Hero is what they do. Ich bin ein Hero.

Not thinking about this is what makes them so enjoyable. c.v ANY show on TV.

Caveat: By actually showing Bats getting it off with one of the playgirls, you'd actually ruin the canon and thus the character. That's the bit you need to be most careful about thinking on. And often where the films fail. Batman doesn't need romance because -sigh- He's the Goddam Batman!

 

[TheBluesader]

Batmanalyzed

Batman is one of the most fascinating, multifaceted superheroes in all of comics ... as long as you don't think about him too much. Allen Varney digs a bit too deeply into the Batman Mythos and unearths some rather unpleasant character traits in the process.

Read Full Article

Good article. I've often wished DC would have the brass to do some Batman stories where he takes on white collar criminals, especially as the current world economy stands.

But that's not the only example of Batman still being, more or less, a character with his feet firmly planted in the 1930s. Batman routinely fights Italian-American gangsters in pinstripe suits and crazy circus folk. These aren't exactly profiles of a majority of contemporary criminals. I know why DC keeps things going in this vein, and that's because Batman still works best in the type of universe for which he was originally created. That's why Bruce Timm wisely went retro-future noir with his animated and comic work, and fans love it because the quality of stories that come out of that universe is very high. But I do worry that at some point Batman's world will be too different from the contemporary one, and his comics won't pick up new readers because they can't figure out what's going on or why they should care.

Of course, he's been going strong now for more than 70 years, so maybe it won't matter. Maybe being Batman is enough. Personally I find that a little unfair, as my grandparents got to see him fighting Nazis, and my parents got to see him taking down pimps and drug-dealers. Why can't I see him taking down child molesters and white collar crooks? I don't know if he can't because DC really thinks it won't sell, or it will anger their masters. I suspect that it's simply because they're keen to go with what they've successfully sold before, so they hire artists that love the nostalgia.

I just wonder how long that can be sustained. Because I'm actually starting to get a little bored with it. Batman needs a cell-phone, TMZ invading the Batcave, and a few DNS attacks on his Bat-servers.

But he can keep the Victorian cape and cowl. Because somethings are timelessly cool.

 

[Milkman Dan]

Here's a billionaire crouching all night in a dark, stinking tenement hallway, waiting to beat the crap out of some nameless junkie. Is there a better metaphor for class conflict? In that war, make no mistake: Batman works for the other side.

American Psycho, anyone?

 

[malestrithe]

At his heart, Batman is a rich boy acting out his revenge fantasies on a nightly basis. That is not behavior to be commended: it should be condemned. Had he spent int as a youth, IDK, dealing with the trauma, then Bruce would be a better adjusted adult. Instead, he thinks he is above the law and dons his cape and cowl.

It does not make him awesome. It makes him sad and pathetic.

 

[Dahemo]

I very much enjoyed this article until the very end.

"A nameless junkie"?

"A metaphor for the class war"?

I'm sorry, but that is not only an innacuracy but a wild logical leap. As far as I'm aware, Batman has never assaulted a "nameless junkie" simply to clean the streets of his presence. The reasons for Batman forgoing big business crime are numerous:

1. It's too realistic. Batman has always had that slightly surreal tint to his universe, his grittiest ever storyline was probably Knightfall and that was by no means realistic.

2. No challenge. A greedy fatcat is no obstacle for Batman, he can't defend himself, but a greedy fatcat with an army of cyborg warrior chimps, now we're getting somewhere.

3. No tangible threat. The Joker plants bombs. Two-Face hijacks public transport. The Scarecrow enslaves minds, but our corrupt city official just hiked the taxes by 3%! And he's skimming off the top! You can't compare these levels of crime, nor can you persuade the reader they are as worthy of Batman's time.

4. Hypocritical Wayne. He's the head of a huge multinational, and as a genius must be aware that some unethical practices have taken place within Wayne Enterprises, he does have to delegate a sizable portion of his decision making. So when he dangles The shoe factory owner by his ankles over the docks, how can he justify to himself, and how can the writers justify to us, that he is so different.

I really see what your saying, and your other analysis is excellent, but your final flourish lacked substance, it's an interesting idea but it doesn't float, even in the crueller versions of batman seen to date...

 

[twm1709]

Well, there is one concept called "comic book logic" you know? it's right there with "Internet Security" and "Microsoft Works" in terms of contradicting names, but still...

 

[Kenjitsuka]

I can't really agree with your analysis, but am too lazy to write a really long full reply.
Also I am not a Batman worshipper, so that doesn't add any motivation either...

"No, what's creepy is a healthy, athletic heterosexual man who persuades entire job-lots of Gotham City's most desirable women to fall on their back, then walks away, repeatedly, unconsummated. "

Just because one guy said this in an interview once makes it (still) true.
Plus he has this whole "the love of my life died" thing going on.

As for the whole targeting muggers instead of bad corporate big shots thing, that *does* tie nicely into his parent's tragedy. Such trauma's IRL do leave extremly deep, very hard to handle and treat -sometimes untreatable- scars. So please don't downplay this; unless your parents also died in front of your eyes you have no right to talk!

On another note, who says he does not have Wayne Enterprises people snif out and then tell officials about other businesses' wrong doings? It's just too boring for the comics, but look at The Dark Knight movie...

 

[Crimson_Dragoon]

At his heart, Batman is a rich boy acting out his revenge fantasies on a nightly basis. That is not behavior to be commended: it should be condemned. Had he spent int as a youth, IDK, dealing with the trauma, then Bruce would be a better adjusted adult. Instead, he thinks he is above the law and dons his cape and cowl.

It does not make him awesome. It makes him sad and pathetic.

No, what makes Batman awesome is his ridiculous skill set and the fact that he can go toe to toe with super-powered villains and heroes.

While I will agree with your assessment of his psyche and motivations, I don't think they make him sad and pathetic. I think they make him more of a tragic figure, who fights crazy villains, but isn't fully right in the head himself.

 

[carpathic]

Excellent article.

I have to say that the appeal for me with Batman has always been that he is not perfect. He is a hideously flawed individual, in many ways worse than the criminals he catches (I have always thought Dexter was based on a slightly less extreme version of Batman). I guess it is the story of redemption that I find so fascinating.

It is like Batman wakes up and say "holy shit, I am a terrible awful person. Perhaps though, I can finally make a change that will make the world better. Then he does his best, and the world stubbornly refuses to change." The redemption though is the fact that Batman continually tries this Sisyphean Task.

To me, all of the other aspects of his personality really fade next to that drive for redemption, the curious juxtaposition of batman's incredible gifts and his horrific flaw.

 

[flabslapper]

This is actually why I like the Else Worlds stories better than when the writers try to keep with continuity. In an Else Worlds story you CAN have Batman accidentally murder the Joker, or blow himself up, or marry Super Man, it's just an interesting story encapsulated into maybe 3 or 4 comics., and then you can reset and start a whole other story arch.

Also I would argue that Batman is not the reason why I like Batman stories, its the villains I find the most fun and interesting.

 

[theaceplaya]

Great article. My only question is when does Bruce Wayne sleep?

 

[Grahav]

The true impossible man

 

[APVarney]

(((Great article. My only question is when does Bruce Wayne sleep?)))

This point, at least, is actually addressed in the comics. Bruce learned mental disciplines in Tibet or somewhere that let him get by with only an hour of sleep per night.

 

[Crazy_Bird]

Well, there was once a book which tackled the issue if Batman is possible. It is called "Becoming Batman: The Possibility of a Superhero". As renown physiologist dedicated his life to explore the idea of a "real" superhero.

His answer: It is possible. on paper. If I remember correctly it is no problem to master different styles of martial arts and attain the physical fitness. Even acquiring most of the knowledge is possible to your mid thirties if you set your life up this way.
But the limiting factors are: fatigue and sleep deprivation and of course a lot of psychic pressure.

 

[opportunemoment]

OK, this was a really interesting article, especially the third point, and so I hate to be the person with no sense of humour about it. But.

(A friend who read a draft of this piece suspected I meant the cliché of homoerotic tensions between Batman and his current Boy Wonder - a notion that also dates from the 1950s, in Frederic Wertham's notorious anti-comics tract Seduction of the Innocent. In all honesty, this never crossed my mind because - news flash - it's stu-u-u-pid, completely unsupported by the evidence.)

Giant typewriters are fine, masks are ridiculous but whatever, Paris Hilton fighting drug crime is problematic but that's just what it is. But homoeroticism? That's just flat out 'stu-u-u-pid', too stupid to even be 'unthinkable' - which it would obviously be otherwise!

To be clear, it's not that I think there is evidence for it, outside people referencing it as an in-joke. It's just that, and I've tried to think of better ways to put this: you sound like an idiot.

Perhaps this was supposed to be a joke, or it's dismissed precisely because it's so much more likely than anything else that ever happens in comic books. But you just sound childish. Calling it stupid with such OTT inflection, referencing Seduction of the Innocent as if a) homoerotic subtext was invented in the 50s and hasn't been relevant since, and b) there is no concievable place for it in comic books except as an outdated boogie man to scare censors with... and then dismissing it entirely out of hand when you're talking about his manipulation of women, where it might actually have been relevant.

I'm just really disappointed that in an otherwise quite interesting article you felt you had to drop this in. It leaves me thinking that - news flash - class warfare aside, this is the only thing you find genuinely unthinkable. And even though it's Batman and again, I DO NOT think he is actually gay, that is really insulting.