shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 9, 2023 8:43:06 GMT -5
So yes, I do now suspect that the antagonism towards Babs came from the fact that creators at DC saw her as a shameless cash grab, firmly connected to an era of Batman that they'd been working hard to distance him from. The fact that she was a lucrative license, and therefore had to remain in print, must have been a constant annoyance to some who felt she had no place in a Post-Batman #217 world. So they could make her look ridiculous, campy, or just simply outclassed, but they likely couldn't get rid of her entirely. Of course, if I'm right, then why did Moore ultimately get the greenlight to take Batgirl out of action once and for all? I haven't read "The Last Batgirl Story" (or whatever it was called) but didn't she decide to retire permanently? At that point they could do whatever they wanted with the character. Moore wanted something shocking to happen to a Bat-Universe character and when you think about it, the choice was limited. Obviously not to a Robin. Not to Gordon. Not to Alfred. Who remained? From a creative standpoint, you're absolutely right. However, more often than not, big decisions made at DC were/are motivated by licensing/merchandising interests, which often turn a far bigger profit for the parent company than the sales of comic books. It's why Starlin was booted from the Batman books after killing off Robin. He was a profitable license. My guess is that Batgirl was still a profitable license in 1987, and so keeping her alive but in the background worked just fine for the higher ups. After all, she could still suit up once every few years to keep the trademark alive. So maybe her perceived value as a license changed once the darker, grittier Batman of Year One gained popularity? |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 9, 2023 8:49:18 GMT -5
Fun fact: when I read "A Killing Joke" I had read practically NOTHING about the Pre-Crisis Batgirl (in Italy they had published very little of the character). I had seen the television series but I hardly remembered it. So when the Joker shot Barbara Gordon I didn't realize she was had been Batgirl. Simply that she was Commissioner Gordon's daughter (which is shocking in itself). So I wonder how many readers drawn to Moore's name and who had read little or nothing of Batman up to that point understood what really happened in the story. When I get to my review of Killing Joke, I will definitely harp on the fact that it's exceptionally easy to miss who Babs even is in that story. I remember reading that moment for the first time and thinking, "I must be reading this wrong. That can't be Batgirl!" and, on some levels, it wasn't. It was more in keeping with her depiction immediately prior to the Crisis - there to support her dad and have no personality nor story of her own. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Jan 9, 2023 9:42:33 GMT -5
Fun fact: when I read "A Killing Joke" I had read practically NOTHING about the Pre-Crisis Batgirl (in Italy they had published very little of the character). I had seen the television series but I hardly remembered it. So when the Joker shot Barbara Gordon I didn't realize she was had been Batgirl. Simply that she was Commissioner Gordon's daughter (which is shocking in itself). So I wonder how many readers drawn to Moore's name and who had read little or nothing of Batman up to that point understood what really happened in the story. When I get to my review of Killing Joke, I will definitely harp on the fact that it's exceptionally easy to miss who Babs even is in that story. I remember reading that moment for the first time and thinking, "I must be reading this wrong. That can't be Batgirl!" and, on some levels, it wasn't. It was more in keeping with her depiction immediately prior to the Crisis - there to support her dad and have no personality nor story of her own. There is this panel in this story  It's very, very meta. On the one hand it wants to underline the contrast with more innocent times. On the other hand as you can see there is no modern Batgirl portrayed. Is it accidental or intentional? Incidentally, since the comic came out in 1988, and knowing how thorough Moore and Bolland were, they started working on it in 86/87 at the very least. Reading your post-Crisis Batman reviews, it gives me the idea that the supporting cast of the Dark Knight at the time was reduced to a minimum. With the exception of Barbara Gordon who was left? Lucius Fox? |
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Jan 9, 2023 10:29:08 GMT -5
Fun fact: when I read "A Killing Joke" I had read practically NOTHING about the Pre-Crisis Batgirl (in Italy they had published very little of the character). I had seen the television series but I hardly remembered it. So when the Joker shot Barbara Gordon I didn't realize she was had been Batgirl. Simply that she was Commissioner Gordon's daughter (which is shocking in itself). So I wonder how many readers drawn to Moore's name and who had read little or nothing of Batman up to that point understood what really happened in the story. When I get to my review of Killing Joke, I will definitely harp on the fact that it's exceptionally easy to miss who Babs even is in that story. I remember reading that moment for the first time and thinking, "I must be reading this wrong. That can't be Batgirl!" and, on some levels, it wasn't. It was more in keeping with her depiction immediately prior to the Crisis - there to support her dad and have no personality nor story of her own. I really look forward to your review of that infamous comic. I was very surprised when DC decided to adopt The Killing Joke as part of the post-crisis canon; I fully expected it to be treated as an "imaginary story", an out-of-continuity thing, set in the pre-Crisis world. (We're going to reboot the title so we can do whatever we want with these characters, right?) Barbara seemed to be years older than usual, both physically and in her mannerism, and the extremely dramatic nature of the story lent it an End-Of-Days feel. (Plus she's clearly written as Gordon's daughter, not his niece). The fact that an Alan Moore & Brian Bolland comic can make me so queasy is proof that anything can happen in this universe! |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Jan 9, 2023 10:39:32 GMT -5
When I get to my review of Killing Joke, I will definitely harp on the fact that it's exceptionally easy to miss who Babs even is in that story. I remember reading that moment for the first time and thinking, "I must be reading this wrong. That can't be Batgirl!" and, on some levels, it wasn't. It was more in keeping with her depiction immediately prior to the Crisis - there to support her dad and have no personality nor story of her own. I was very surprised when DC decided to adopt The Killing Joke as part of the post-crisis canon; I fully expected it to be treated as an "imaginary story", an out-of-continuity thing, set in the pre-Crisis world. (We're going to reboot the title so we can do whatever we want with these characters, right?) Barbara seemed to be years older than usual, both physically and in her mannerism, and the extremely dramatic nature of the story lent it an End-Of-Days feel. (Plus she's clearly written as Gordon's daughter, not his niece). I remember that the canonicity of it was debated at the time (well, as far as you can debate anything without the Internet just using fanzines and mail pages). Barbara had disappeared from the stories and in them no one was saying "Hey do you remember when the Joker paralyzed the commissioner's daughter?!?!". Even when it was revealed that Oracle was actually Barbara Gordon many said that the story was not completely canon (remember that many claimed that at the end of the story Batman kills the Joker). |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 9, 2023 15:15:09 GMT -5
When I get to my review of Killing Joke, I will definitely harp on the fact that it's exceptionally easy to miss who Babs even is in that story. I remember reading that moment for the first time and thinking, "I must be reading this wrong. That can't be Batgirl!" and, on some levels, it wasn't. It was more in keeping with her depiction immediately prior to the Crisis - there to support her dad and have no personality nor story of her own. There is this panel in this story It's very, very meta. On the one hand it wants to underline the contrast with more innocent times. On the other hand as you can see there is no modern Batgirl portrayed. Is it accidental or intentional? If I recall correctly, the work is littered with visual references to the Atom Age (including the 1950s Batmobile being in the Bat Cave), but it doesn't make any references to the Silver nor Bronze Ages, so it may have been less a specific effort to exclude Batgirl and more an issue of Babs being created in the wrong decade. As for why the constant visual nods to the 1950s, I truly don't have a guess. Could have been what Bolland grew up with, could have been a desire to clash the dark depths of this story with the simpler, most innocent era of Batman comics, or it could have been a deliberate effort to blot out Batgirl from this story. By the way, for these reasons, The Killing Joke's presence in Post-Crisis continuity is iffy at best. We know the Joker paralyzes Babs in the Post-Crisis continuity, but the Atom Age never happened to the Post-Crisis Batman, so some of the details here do not jibe. Also, isn't it heavily implied that Batman kills Joker at the end? Clearly that isn't a part of Post-Crisis continuity. Not even. If I'm not mistaken, Lucius Fox doesn't make his Post-Crisis debut until Marv Wolfman's run, circa 1989 or 1990. I don't recall Collins, Starlin, or Grant/Wagner ever using him, and Mike W. Barr's run, while written in the Post-Crisis, is attached to Pre-Crisis continuity. So Bruce had Alfred and Jason, and that's pretty much it. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 9, 2023 15:22:53 GMT -5
When I get to my review of Killing Joke, I will definitely harp on the fact that it's exceptionally easy to miss who Babs even is in that story. I remember reading that moment for the first time and thinking, "I must be reading this wrong. That can't be Batgirl!" and, on some levels, it wasn't. It was more in keeping with her depiction immediately prior to the Crisis - there to support her dad and have no personality nor story of her own. I really look forward to your review of that infamous comic. I was very surprised when DC decided to adopt The Killing Joke as part of the post-crisis canon; I fully expected it to be treated as an "imaginary story", an out-of-continuity thing, set in the pre-Crisis world. (We're going to reboot the title so we can do whatever we want with these characters, right?) Barbara seemed to be years older than usual, both physically and in her mannerism, and the extremely dramatic nature of the story lent it an End-Of-Days feel. (Plus she's clearly written as Gordon's daughter, not his niece). The fact that an Alan Moore & Brian Bolland comic can make me so queasy is proof that anything can happen in this universe! Agreed on all counts. The problem is DC let Denny O'Neil know, in no uncertain terms, that he was there editing the Bat books to generate as much sales as possible. That was all the higher ups were interested in beyond keeping licensed properties profitable. Thus, if it was selling well, BAM! it was suddenly in continuity. One of my favorite O'Neil moments from this era is his intro to Batman Vs. Predator where he asks himself whether or not this is in continuity and essentially responds with, "Yeah. Sure. Why not?" Loyalty to characters, artistic integrity, and logical continuity adherence weren't really on his radar. The three biggest Batman books everyone was talking about were DKR, Year One, and The Killing Joke, so they were all in continuity somehow. The continuity veers from DKR once Jason dies and Batman does not retire, but Year One and Killing Joke? "Yeah. Sure. Why not?" |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 9, 2023 15:35:47 GMT -5
I was very surprised when DC decided to adopt The Killing Joke as part of the post-crisis canon; I fully expected it to be treated as an "imaginary story", an out-of-continuity thing, set in the pre-Crisis world. (We're going to reboot the title so we can do whatever we want with these characters, right?) Barbara seemed to be years older than usual, both physically and in her mannerism, and the extremely dramatic nature of the story lent it an End-Of-Days feel. (Plus she's clearly written as Gordon's daughter, not his niece). I remember that the canonicity of it was debated at the time (well, as far as you can debate anything without the Internet just using fanzines and mail pages). Barbara had disappeared from the stories and in them no one was saying "Hey do you remember when the Joker paralyzed the commissioner's daughter?!?!". Even when it was revealed that Oracle was actually Barbara Gordon many said that the story was not completely canon (remember that many claimed that at the end of the story Batman kills the Joker). Ha. I should have read this post before I replied! The only place where I'll disagree is that what The Joker did to Babs was acknowledged five months after the fact in Batman #426 (and long before Babs becomes Oracle). The heat is on The Joker because he did that to the commissioner's daughter. We then see Babs in a wheelchair from a distance at Jason Todd's funeral in Batman #428. But I absolutely agree that The Killing Joke does not totally synch with Post-Crisis continuity. Something like that happened, but it did not play out in exactly that way. |
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Jan 9, 2023 17:51:51 GMT -5
I remember that the canonicity of it was debated at the time (well, as far as you can debate anything without the Internet just using fanzines and mail pages). Barbara had disappeared from the stories and in them no one was saying "Hey do you remember when the Joker paralyzed the commissioner's daughter?!?!". Even when it was revealed that Oracle was actually Barbara Gordon many said that the story was not completely canon (remember that many claimed that at the end of the story Batman kills the Joker). Ha. I should have read this post before I replied! The only place where I'll disagree is that what The Joker did to Babs was acknowledged five months after the fact in Batman #426 (and long before Babs becomes Oracle). The heat is on The Joker because he did that to the commissioner's daughter. We then see Babs in a wheelchair from a distance at Jason Todd's funeral in Batman #428. But I absolutely agree that The Killing Joke does not totally synch with Post-Crisis continuity. Something like that happened, but it did not play out in exactly that way. Thank you for the corrections! Probably Moore started to work on it, what, in the 86? There wasn't even a "Post-Crisis continuity" at the time. If anything, the story fits perfectly in the Earth-1 continuity. The only thing that they probably had to change was the relationship between Barbara and the Commissioner (daughter/niece). |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 9, 2023 18:09:07 GMT -5
Probably Moore started to work on it, what, in the 86? There wasn't even a "Post-Crisis continuity" at the time. If anything, the story fits perfectly in the Earth-1 continuity. The only thing that they probably had to change was the relationship between Barbara and the Commissioner (daughter/niece). I look at it as being sort of on par with Moore's "Whatever Happened To The Man of Tomorrow?" Everything is ending anyway, so tell whatever story you want before it all gets wiped away. Then O'Neil saw the sales numbers and made it count in Post-Crisis continuity. |
|
|
|
Post by franzwesten on Jan 10, 2023 13:51:42 GMT -5
I am not sure, but "Son of the Demon" was also started in pre-crisis days. Which overall leads me to the idea, did Denny O'Neil not reboot the Batman franchise hard (as they did with WW and Superman) to keep his own stories, especially Ra's Al'Ghul stuff in continuity somehow?
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 10, 2023 14:12:53 GMT -5
I am not sure, but "Son of the Demon" was also started in pre-crisis days. Which overall leads me to the idea, did Denny O'Neil not reboot the Batman franchise hard (as they did with WW and Superman) to keep his own stories, especially Ra's Al'Ghul stuff in continuity somehow? It's certainly possible, but no one at the Bat Office during this time has ever depicted O'Neil as pushing his own creative agendas. He is depicted, at best, as being easy going and, at worst, as being completely uninvolved (unless there was an event or idea to boost sales at stake). I think it's pretty safe to say that the reason there was no hard reboot was that neither O'Neil nor anyone under him was watching/guarding Batman's post-Crisis continuity all that carefully, nor cared what "counted" and what didn't until Marv Wolfman took over on the core title in 1989. Mike W. Barr was writing in the Pre-Crisis universe, Max Collins wanted to reboot Jason Todd's origin but otherwise keep things status quo, Wagner and Grant were writing as if it was the 1970s and Batman was a solo hero again, and Frank Miller, Alan Moore, and any other non-regular writer being invited to do a Batman story during this time were playing entirely by their own rules, so it was disorganized chaos for those first two years until Wolfman started taking the time to flesh out the Post-Crisis Batman's world. Welcome to the community, by the way! |
|
|
|
Post by franzwesten on Jan 10, 2023 14:32:52 GMT -5
I am certainly amazed that no one has ever asked those questions in interviews with the authors involved. I think Max Collins said something, but he was mostly complaining about the art and the artists changing not getting his scripts. But I am sure that Denny O'Neil "assumed" Collins would write Batman like his Ms.Tree series or his hardboiled novels. In the first two issues of his run, that were published before Year One, I think the tone is different from his later run. Broken necks, implied rape, ... After that he returned to write the whole series oddly wholesome (Sound of Silence?) and probably that was not like the readers or Denny O'Neil wanted. So I blame a lack of communication? But it also raises the question why Collins changed his interpretation that much. (His Jason Todd was a great idea, but the execution was rushed and "Ma Gunn" adds some odd campiness into the origin and overall the art does not make the whole "kid on the street" angle overly dramatic. For years I wanted a reimagining of this origin, like "The Long Halloween" did for Two-Face, but with keeping the same idea).
|
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Jan 10, 2023 14:34:32 GMT -5
I am not sure, but "Son of the Demon" was also started in pre-crisis days. Which overall leads me to the idea, did Denny O'Neil not reboot the Batman franchise hard (as they did with WW and Superman) to keep his own stories, especially Ra's Al'Ghul stuff in continuity somehow? It's certainly possible, but no one at the Bat Office during this time has ever depicted O'Neil as pushing his own creative agendas. He is depicted, at best, as being easy going and, at worst, as being completely uninvolved (unless there was an event or idea to boost sales at stake). I think it's pretty safe to say that the reason there was no hard reboot was that neither O'Neil nor anyone under him was watching/guarding Batman's post-Crisis continuity all that carefully, nor cared what "counted" and what didn't until Marv Wolfman took over on the core title in 1989. Mike W. Barr was writing in the Pre-Crisis universe, Max Collins wanted to reboot Jason Todd's origin but otherwise keep things status quo, Wagner and Grant were writing as if it was the 1970s and Batman was a solo hero again, and Frank Miller, Alan Moore, and any other non-regular writer being invited to do a Batman story during this time were playing entirely by their own rules, so it was disorganized chaos for those first two years until Wolfman started taking the time to flesh out the Post-Crisis Batman's world. Welcome to the community, by the way! Any idea why didn't they go for a "hard reboot" like Wonder Woman or Superman? |
|
|
|
Post by franzwesten on Jan 10, 2023 14:52:45 GMT -5
It's certainly possible, but no one at the Bat Office during this time has ever depicted O'Neil as pushing his own creative agendas. He is depicted, at best, as being easy going and, at worst, as being completely uninvolved (unless there was an event or idea to boost sales at stake). I think it's pretty safe to say that the reason there was no hard reboot was that neither O'Neil nor anyone under him was watching/guarding Batman's post-Crisis continuity all that carefully, nor cared what "counted" and what didn't until Marv Wolfman took over on the core title in 1989. Mike W. Barr was writing in the Pre-Crisis universe, Max Collins wanted to reboot Jason Todd's origin but otherwise keep things status quo, Wagner and Grant were writing as if it was the 1970s and Batman was a solo hero again, and Frank Miller, Alan Moore, and any other non-regular writer being invited to do a Batman story during this time were playing entirely by their own rules, so it was disorganized chaos for those first two years until Wolfman started taking the time to flesh out the Post-Crisis Batman's world. Welcome to the community, by the way! Any idea why didn't they go for a "hard reboot" like Wonder Woman or Superman? I think Denny O'Neil never wanted to do that in the first place. A lot of the stuff seemed to have happened by accident. - not sure who was the main driver behind rebooting Jason Todd (Mike W Barr certainly did not get the memo) - Alfred had entered Bruce Wayne's life when he was already Batman (and there was Robin) in the pre-crisis universe, the first time he was portrayed as the old family butler was in some Superfriends episode, IIRC, and Frank Miller used the same take in Year One and DKR but I think he simply did not know better and it was no deliberate change! Denny O'Neil just did not edit properly! When you look at Year Two, it does not seem that Alfred raised Bruce, instead they rebooted Leslie Thomkins into some sort of surrogate mother (previously she had been just an old lady from Park Row). Okay, that's more of an indication for a reboot, but again, I think this was just Barr doing his own ideas and no one stopping him. Again, "Year Two" is just Barr's old "Batman 1980" proposal he did years before and now he took the chance. - I've read (from John Byrne?!) that Gordon's baby in Year One was supposed to be Barbara but then they realized that timeline wise this did not make change so they turned her into a boy but kept the story and did not bother to integrate Barbara in some way. Again, I guess blame the editor. - that Batman traveled the world and was some master expert in martial arts and so on was already implied in Denny O'Neil's stories in the pre-crisis days (albeit most writers portrayed him more of a brawler and someone who has stayed mostly in Gotham, I remember a Brave & The Bold story where Batman knocks out Richard Dragon(?) "american-style", as he calls it). I remember that some writer refered to Batman Begins Batman as an Denny O'Neil Batman. - Legends of the Dark Knight seriously makes things more complicated, as it is not canon but then again it is when it's conveniet. Technically you could get the idea that Batman was rebooted but his main titles happen in "our time", while LOTDK is there to "fill" the gaps by showing Batman's past. But it never worked out like this. - Bruce did not know who Selina Kyle is in Knightfall, again, I think this was just not edited properly. - Batman & Superman break up happened pre-crisis but again gets complicated because Batman appears in Man of Steel and John Byrne also said that he had no idea how post-crisis Batman was about to be portrayed so he just "guessed". Stuff like "Batman is just an urban legend" (in DC context VERY ridiculous) were all later additions. Considering that the crisis was supposed to streamline the DCU this is very, very messy and I think keeping pre-crisis would have been better. |
|
