Batman, Anglo Saxon Prince of New England

Like all significant historical figures of the United States of America, Batman has been nearly entirely converted into a grotesque mass of marketable terms unconcerned with coherency, vision, or longevity. Modern Batman is a found-family father and pseudo-millenial concerned primarily with inert internal monologue therapy talk.

This is not Batman. These things do not materially contribute to the things that make Batman cool, or provide any ground for the character to exist on in perpetuity. Batman has been for many years and will continue to be an American Icon really in the vein of Paul Bunyan and Johnny Appleseed. He is at least basically understood and readily recognizable to anyone who would consider themselves an American. He is part of every major American industry from film to Military Industrial work.

Batman, in earliest days, was a costumed cult-buster and detective. Gotham city was a fictional arena in which all the problems necessary for a character of that sort could co-exist and not upset the readers understanding of the real world circumstance of a particular place. Huns and vampires and wacky serial killers haunted the streets and alleys of Gotham city, and little could be done about it until the Batman took to the streets. It was so iconic that forever after Gotham has always in every writer and every artists imagination made an effort to mirror or parallel this. But the modern Batman has no place in this city, and this city has no place in modern Batman.

Gotham city is Batman’s kingdom. Bruce Wayne is an old money WASP who lives on a mansion on a hill on the outskirts of town. How many Lovecraft stories start like this? He, as Bruce Wayne, visits upon the city to council with people like the Chief of Police, socialites, the Mayor, etc. At night, he stalks the rooftops and roads as the spirit of vengeance, visiting those who do evil against the kingdom and its inhabitants. He is in every way, the mythical proto-germanic king. He is the vessel of the wild hunt which punishes the wicked that take from those who earn their living by honest labor otherwise uncontested by the incompetent and corrupt police force. He finds and exposes the non-human creatures that do terrible bloody violence in their own quest for vengeance or to slake inhuman bloodthirst.

His terrible form is in the same vein. The Bat is an inversion or a 60 degree turn of the winged, blind justice of european mythology. He is channeling the ancestral traditions that he is endowed to carry as a founding family of the city and of the country. He is entrusted with the public welfare, all the wealth of the Kingdom, and free reign over its territories. To some degree writers actually understand this. Denny O’Neill understands and created the conflict with Ras Al Ghul. Ras Al Ghul is an appropriate threat for Batman and for Gotham precisely because he is a foreign king with an alien and mechanically subversive culture. Not only that, but Ras presents the mytho-poetry of Damian Wayne- who is Mordred to his Arthur. The Court of Owls is similarly a “good” villain for Batman because they present a credible threat to King and Kingdom, they are just as old if not older than his family in Gotham, and they work in the same dark ways that the Batman does to accomplish their agenda.

I will continue to post about Batman in this thread, discussing specific villains and what I think constitutes proper awareness and respect for the character.

2 Likes

Batman suffers immensely from being attached to a wider universe of characters and themes that dilute the essence of what makes him cool and good. Batman has no business interacting with let alone fighting Darkseid, or really any member of the New Gods. This was the opinion of Jack Kirby, who intended to write the New Gods entirely separate from everything else at DC Comics, but lo, the cash cow was fat, and editorial is retarded, and so Batman has to fire a booger gun at Darkseid that doesnt actually kill him and Darkseid Doesnt Actually Kill Batman either, so no one is really at threat at all, we just got to ship the panel with Batman and Darkseid in the same frame.

On that note, writers have at interval grappled with the idea that Batman could be a “Full Time” Justice League character. My introduction to this was at a tender young age watching Justice League Unlimited, where Batman rightly tells the League to fuck off when they ask him to turn himself in after deciding without him what they were going to do about their problem. Batman does not need to monitor crime from a space station, that shouldnt be something that occupies his time. It doesnt do anything to solve the basic problem of his life which is that he feels a constant and immediate unquenchable rage that his parents were senselessly and brutally murdered over a wallet when he was 8 years old. Sending bad guys to the emergency room and sleuthing out plots to collapse the city’s society to protect his parents vision of a Gotham of prosperous Americans does in fact make him feel as though he is solving his problem.

3 Likes

The circumstance of Robin is another foundational Anglo-Saxon Germanic tradition. Robin can most easily be understood to in essence be a squire to the Dark Knight. In the strict traditional sense, a squire is not bound by the strictures of Chivalry or a Knights particular oaths to land and lord, he has none of these responsibilities, his responsibility is to the Knight under whom he serves. In the case of Robin, while Robin(s) share the trauma of Batman and it is a necessary bridge between the two characters as people, Robin is unburdened by the quasi-psychopathy that Batman displays because of the lengths he has gone to to accomplish his mission, because he has been inducted into it via a candlelight ceremony and can now involve himself immediately with the full resources that Batman has created for his adventures. This is a very important distinction to make, that Robin and Batman are actually very different not only as people but as characters with a purpose, as it should inform us about what constitutes a good Robin character, and a good Robin story or story arc.

Dick Grayson becoming Nightwing is the fulfillment of the Robin’s purpose. To become a knight in your own right is to have land, friends, and enemies all your own, your own coat of arms and castle. This is all accomplished with Nightwing. Nightwing also provides I think a very interesting and acceptable moral distinction between Bruce Wayne and Dick Grayson, which is that fundamentally Dick Grayson must be a much more normal person than Bruce or he would not go to the lengths he does to distance himself from him and become his own person. As briefly mentioned before in this thread, Damian Wayne has a particular role and archetype not shared by other Robins, which is that the wicked sorceress (Talia Al Ghul) seduced him and was begotten with child. She then uses this child as a way to force herself on him morally, a lesser more political invasion of his Kingdom by agents of Ras Al Ghul who we have established as a peer and threat to the Batman in Gotham. When I say that Damian is Mordred, I mean that as the intention of his mother, and his grandfather, and not necessarily as an indictment of his character or where I think it needs to go. I am all for Batman being able to recondition him and put him on the path he begun, but that has a lot to do with the fact that I think Damian is the one true inheritor to the cowl. I think Damian is the only Robin who comes from a background where it makes sense that he could grow up to be as insane, committed, skilled, and paranoid as Bruce Wayne. All other Robins fall short for me. It’s a diatribe for a different thread but I think that Tim Drake should never have stayed a Robin, and bringing back Jason Todd was its own pointless disaster.

I think most would agree with me in saying Batman overall has a really solid Rogues gallery. I like Poison Ivy, I like Harley Quinn, I like Riddler and Penguin and Freeze I like Scarecrow, Man-Bat, and Mad Hatter.

My favorite, and the one I think archetypally challenges Batman the best is Two Face. Two Face can be seen as a sort of court vizier become a plotting sorcerer. Harvey Dent meaning something to Bruce Wayne before he is ever Batman, and means something to Gotham. Dents arc as prosecutor who flies too close to the sun and is burned for it, falling not just down to earth but down to Gotham, where he becomes a twisted amalgam of the sort of judicial logical reasoning he was practicing as a mechanism, is a good counter thrust to Batman in a metaphysical sense. It is also necessary that Two Face doesnt try to commit or justify mass murder or terrorism for its own sake, he does exactly the type of outfit-style crime he prosecuted as Harvey Dent, and throws a monkey wrench into the process of it by using his particular brand of logical realism to inflame the situation. A man who was twisted and broken and finally led into an existence of parallelism to his former life by personal tragedy is in itself an expression of Gotham city- and Batman.

I would say a bad Batman villain is Firefly or Deathstroke, also Deadshot or Szasz. Not that they are bad characters necessarily, but I think they would be better served in other places in the grander narrative that we have thrust upon us. Being a hitman or assassin who is for some reason an independent actor seeking vengeance on Batman for a job gone wrong over and over and over doesnt make you a good Batman villain candidate- it makes you an unprofessional hitman. Deathstroke as a Batman villain is a refutation of Deathstroke as a character. The worlds greatest assassin is not the worlds greatest assassin if he has the baggage of being a Batman villain around his neck- he needs to be doing other shit! Like actually getting away with killing people! Put him in Nightwing’s rotation and actually take it seriously, theres a million ways to do this. Maybe Deadshot is on the Suicide Squad all the time for a reason. What is the point of having him in Gotham, literally ever, after the first 3 times Batman puts him in prison because Deadshot can’t kill him. Would a guy whose main goal it is to get rich doing what he is good at not just try and kill literally anyone else anywhere else if Gotham had Batman in it?

90 years of Joker comics have inured me to “psychos” in Gotham. The original Joker appearances I think are cool and have an interesting thing going on, I like that he comes back from certain death over and over. This makes much more sense to me than him being in Arkham pretty much at all, because the sort of shit he was getting up to back in the day was like “Gassing a room with the chief of police and mayor in it, then their friends every hour for 12 hours! Hee hee!”
But fundamentally I think Joker as a character is overused, has too much stimulation for there to be meaningful interaction with the character, he has simply been done to death, they should literally kill him and just leave it. Theres a path to be walked with the consequences of Harley Quinn, who many agree has become entirely obnoxious, that to me is not dissimilar from my thoughts on the Joker.
I think it can be fun for Batman to stop psychos and Gotham should have them I dont mean to say that Batman villains shouldnt be crazy, but put Szasz and Firefly in Hub City and start writing Question Comics again with some vigor.

1 Like