Detective Comics #607

"The Mud Pack, Part Four: The China Clay Syndrome"
writer: Alan Grant
pencils: Norm Breyfogle
inks: Steve Mitchell
letters: Todd Klein
colors: Adrienne Roy
asst. editor: Dan Raspler
editor: Denny O'Neil
creator: Bob Kane
Looker created by: Mike Barr & Jim Aparo (what an odd credit to include)

grade: B-

Oh, wait. This story is still going? I've said it before and I'll say it again: Grant and Breyfogle are not multi-part story arc writers. They don't provide the kind of dense/tight plotting required to give a four part story momentum and a consistent identity. All of their best work were one or two part stories, and I can't help but feel that this four part format was imposed upon them by Denny in time for the release of the Batman film.

This is a decent enough issue in many respects, but it just feels completely detached from the other three parts of this storyline as Payne and Fuller (who, by the way, still doesn't have a name as of this issue) have already reached their resolution by the first page, and Karlo is pretty much onto an entirely new story plot in this issue, his partnership with the other Clayfaces a distant memory by this point.

I do enjoy the pairing of Payne and Fuller, two lonely souls seeking out normal lives, and Grant makes that pairing a little more believable and powerful this time around, though I still question the abruptness with which Payne suddenly seems cured of his insanity. Wasn't he prone to murderous rages just last issue, and wasn't he still married to a mannequin two issues before that? Thankfully, Grant takes the time to spend a little more time on characterization this time around, and that makes me enjoy the pairing enough to suspend such disbeliefs. He even employs his wizardry with dialect again, giving Fuller and Payne their distinct speaking styles again -- Fuller a little more plain and sincere (again, the kicked puppy feeling), and Payne dramatic and eloquent. I enjoyed that.

Oh, also, I have to correct myself this time around. Fuller finally referred to the former group as the "Mud Pack." First and only time that name actually gets used in the story.

Man, it's always powerful returning to Breyfogle's art after being away for an issue or two (In this case, parts 1 and 2 of Lonely Place of Dying -- who'd of thought I'd ever consider Aparo the inferior of two Batman artists??). Batman's frenzied slobbering on page 3 was a particular favorite of mine this time around, as well as Looker's hypnotic gaze on page 9. I am furious to discover, though, that my copy of this issue does not contain the Breyfogle poster. I must have liked it enough to pull it out when I was 9, but I have absolutely no memory of what it looked like! Argh!!

So what's the deal with Looker? I feel like Grant is working way too hard to promote her in this storyline, just as he did with The Demon in the previous story arc. The difference is that The Demon was likeable. Looker feels like something invented by a creative team hungry for a royalty check. Nothing about her personality seems all that compelling to me, and she feels drastically out of place in a Batman story. I also can't imagine either she or Batman being that casual about her just having peaked through Batman's mind, especially when even Grant has acknowledged as of late how over the edge he's become. Got to love the visuals Breyfogle chooses to depict as his memories torment him within his mind though -- the only recognizable faces I could make out were The Ventriloquist and Cornelius Stirk, both creations of this creative team. Come on, guys -- Bruce has far worse demons than those two second-rate (though amazingly compelling) villains he battled once each.

Sorry, Chad and foxley, but I'm still not getting the appeal of Karlo. I paid careful attention this time, and I couldn't get the read on him that both of you have. I don't know if you see him the way that you do because of some previous story (or perhaps the Secret Origins issue), but Grant just doesn't paint him in the same compelling light that both of you do. He's just a slightly over the edge bad guy (though I'd hesitate to even call him full blown crazy) who wants more power. And, incidentally, I have a hard time buying that simply injecting Payne and Fuller's blood into his body would magically give him the ability to precisely control both of their abilities (at least until Looker gets involved). Oh well.

And, of course, Batman leaves the possibility of Karlo's return wide open. Shouldn't you be a bit more careful with a bad guy that dangerous -- do more to follow up than joke about alerting China?

Oh, and Fuller can now pretty much do anything she wants with her body. It doesn't even have to be copied from someone else (ex. the hawk wings in the beginning, or the shape-changing Karlo does with her powers towards the end).

Also, I'm assuming Batman's costume contains some kind of armor, or else Karlo certainly would have burnt through and melted Batman's skin while holding him. We even see some kind of plasma on the costume throughout the battle, but it never seems to burn through.

By the way, Denny states in the letters column that Batman and Detective picked up a few thousand new readers after the film's release. I know many of us were wondering if the film had actually succeeded in boosting readership.


The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence: Fuller and Payne are angry at Karlo but decide not to pursue him, Looker rescues Batman from his mental torture by entering his mind, they figure out that Karlo has gone to a medical lab to get Payne and Fuller's blood injected into his body, Batman arrives at Gotham hospital too late and takes on Karlo while he possesses the abilities of both Payne and Fuller, Looker arrives at the last moment and is somehow able to telekenetically overload Karlo's powers, he involuntarily melts the ground and falls deep into the earth, and the story closes on Fuller and Payne apparently deciding to share their lives together, passionately kissing as they watch the sun rise.

Really enjoyed the Payne and Fuller romance. The rest didn't do much for me. I wasn't sold on Karlo, and I definitely wasn't sold on Looker. In fact, this really didn't feel like a Batman story. It felt like a story in which Batman got caught amidst a bunch of far more powerful people who pretty much worked out the main action of the story without him. Honestly, what did Batman actually DO at any point in this story beyond figure out where Karlo was headed?

Does Batman Need a Robin?

As we make our way through "Lonely Place of Dying" and the inevitable emergence of Tim Drake as the third Robin, I think it's important to explore the guiding premise behind these events -- the idea that Batman needs a Robin.

Let's explore this from a number of angles:


1. History

Ever since the '89 Batman movie (and, perhaps, before that in the O'Neil/Adams era) fans have raised the point that Batman began as a dark solo avenger and Robin was a later imposition upon the character that changed the feel of the title; ergo: Batman does not need a Robin. That's not exactly a misconception, but it is misleading. After all, Robin joined the crusade only 11 issues after Batman started. Prior to Dick Grayson leaving for college in 1969, Batman spent less than one year of his 30 year run as a solo hero. Certainly, fans from the good old days remembered the dynamic duo, not the mysterious solo protagonist.


2. Cultural impact

Also keep in mind that Batman wasn't really on the pop-culture radar prior to Robin joining. It was immediately after Robin signed on that Batman became a part of the cultural zeitgeist (getting his own title, the newspaper strip, the movie serials, the cameo on Superman's radio show, etc.) I don't know if anyone has ever tried to prove or disprove this, but it seems likely that a lot of the initial attraction of Batman that distinguished him from the vast array of other superheroes of the early Golden Age was the fact that he had a boy sidekick with which readers could identity. This would certainly seem supported both by the fact that he rose to such cultural prominence right after Robin's entrance and that so many other heroes picked up boy sidekicks in imitation of him. From a cultural perspective, Batman may have needed Robin in order to attain his first thirty years of notoriety.


3. Bill Finger's rationale

Finger certainly felt that Batman wasn't a sustainable character without Robin. He worried that a figure as solitary as Batman could not continue to effectively move plots forward without giving Batman someone to talk to. In the modern age, we're comfortable with pages and pages of internal narration, but in order for Batman to survive the Golden Age, Finger certainly felt that Batman needed a Robin.


4. The proof is in the pudding: Frank Robbins, Denny O'Neil, Steve Englehart, and Alan Grant

In a darker modern age, writers have since proven that Batman can be dramatically compelling without the distraction of a boy sidekick. Perhaps a man so single-minded in committing his life to vigilantism shouldn't also have to function as some kind of role model to a younger companion. Fans who favor these writers would certainly seems to serve as proof that Batman doesn't need a Robin.


5. The Middle Road: Gerry Conway, Doug Moench, and Mike W. Barr

Gerry Conway may have been the first to argue that Batman needed a Robin. As a solo Batman became increasingly dark and troubled, Dick considered the possibility that his presence had helped to keep Bruce sane for most of his career. Moench continued this line of thinking in allowing Jason Todd to fill that void in Bruce's life -- providing a reason for Bruce not to tip over the edge each night; someone for whom to keep it together. In a sense, having to be a role model ceased to be a needless interference in Batman's world and instead became a vital tool in keeping him together.

Mike W. Barr gave more attention to this concept in his own post-Crisis run, depicting a generally carefree Batman and Robin who could occasionally and randomly go completely over the line, seething uncontrolled rage that seemed to come out of nowhere. He ultimately worked hard to suggest that Bruce and Jason were both driven by dark rage, but kept each other sane through a facade of light-hearted fun. The significance of this is that it allowed Batman both to be tremendously dark/conflicted and fun/lighthearted at the same time. I felt this was an incredibly successful approach to the character that opened the doorway for Batman, allowing him to be explored in any number of ways, no longer limited either to dark brooding or lighthearted simplicity. This Batman certainly needed a Robin.


6. Post-Death in the Family

Jim Starlin was very explicit about the fact that he didn't understand how a character like Batman could ever work with a boy sidekick, and he tried to prove the flaw in the boy-sidekick logic by killing Jason off in "A Death in the Family." Batman's grief in reaction to the death, the sheer guilt he experienced for endangering a minor's life made it perfectly understandable why Batman should never have a Robin and probably never would have one again. How selfish to endanger a minor's life for the sake of keeping your own inner demons in check?


7. Commercial pressures at Warner

Unfortunately for Starlin, Warner Communications' merchandizing department absolutely felt that Batman needed a Robin because Robin was integral to the brand name. So, regardless of issues of logic, of characterization, of tone, or of any other artistic concern, issues of profit led to the plan for introducing a third Robin.


8. Tim Drake's logic

Tim's logic in "A Lonely Place of Dying" is that Batman has become dark and restless because he no longer has a Robin, and so giving him a Robin will make him act normal again. I can only assume writer Marv Wolfman and editor Denny O'Neil agreed with this logic since Dick Grayson and Alfred both did, Dick even going so far as to suggest that Tim should be that Robin. But this logic doesn't make any sense. The Batman of these issues hadn't gone over the line because he didn't have a Robin; he'd gone over the line out of rage and grief for losing the previous Robin. Why in the world would giving him another underage liability to worry about make him better? Worse yet, we must consider...

9. Issues of teen liability: Tim Drake vs. Jason Todd vs. Dick Grayson

The choice of Dick as the first Robin almost made sense. The kid was now an orphan with nowhere else to go AND he was already an experienced gymnist who wouldn't require much training to stay alive in the field. The pre-Crisis Jason worked in the same way, and in, the post-Crisis, Max Allen Collins' entire logic in making Jason a ghetto thug seemed to be in showing that he was in greater physical and emotional danger without Batman. Therefore, choosing him as a partner might actually increase the kid's chances of making it through life alive and well-adjusted.

But then there's Tim Drake -- not an orphan, in no danger without Batman's help, happy, well-adjusted, and with a caring family waiting at home for him. Of all the Robin's before or after, Tim Drake made the absolute least sense as a partner, especially in the wake of Batman beating himself up over his responsibility in what had happened to Jason.


IN CONCLUSION:

So, does Batman need a Robin? There's no simple answer. It can easily be argued either way, though anytime Batman ever goes solo in the future, writers and heads of merchandizing departments will never be able to resist the temptation to give Batman yet another Robin sidekick.

But, more importantly to this thread, the post-Jason Todd Batman might have needed a Robin (nodding back to how Conway, Moench, and Barr had depicted the character), but that wasn't why he was unstable, having another kid sidekick to worry about should have caused him to become even less stable, and having a kid sidekick with everything going for him in life was probably the absolute last thing Batman needed post-Jason Todd.

Tim was added because Warner's merchandizing department said Batman needed a Robin. There's no other logic for making him Robin that holds any weight. Starlin did too good of a job destroying the logic of kid sidekicks with "A Death in the Family."

Detective Comics #608

"Anarky in Gotham City"
writer: Alan Grant
pencils: Norm Breyfogle
inks: Steve Mitchell
letters: Todd Klein
colors: Adrienne Roy
assoc. editor: Dan Raspler
editor: Denny O'Neil
creator: Bob Kane

grade: A-

Ah, now this feels like a Grant/Breyfogle story (whereas the previous Mud Pack storyline felt a bit out of character and imposed). This first in a two part storyline is densely plotted and rich in ideas, information presented, and (of course) visuals. It was particularly fun to read this knowing how it ends. Breyfogle is always so careful to show Anarky's head facing perfectly forward, never tilting or turning (if you've never read this story before, trust me -- this matters), and Grant and Breyfogle serve up some massive misdirection on who Anarky is when we meet the Machin family for the first time.

As for Anarky himself, I still don't understand this character after all these years. When I read this comic as a 9 year old, it was my first introduction to the concept of anarchy, and so I walked away believing it was a kind of extreme democracy in which the people's vote is what matters. In hindsight, Anarky is actually more of a fascist, enforcing morality in accordance with his own definitions and answering to no one. But Anarky as an anarchist? I don't see it.

The costume is a clear theft of V For Vendetta (with a slight Amadeus twist), and yet V was fighting a totalitarian regime. Anarky, on the other hand, seems furious that the government is too weak-willed in dealing with people who should be punished. That's kind of the exact opposite of what V stood for. Anarky seems to believe in a democracy in which all voices are heard, and the punishment for those who defy them is extreme. And, by the way, when are letters to the editor ever the voice of the people? They generally reflect the most extreme outlying perspectives on a given issue. What would Anarky do if the publisher printed two letters that disagreed with one another, or that defied his own particular take on morality?

Still, I really like Anarky, particularly in the distinct voices Grant gives to him (that's always Grant's greatest strength), giving him an eloquent V-for-Vendetta-like voice, and yet betraying that voice with the familiarity of a fanboy teen upon accidentally running into Johnny Vomit at first. Subtle and brilliant.

At this point, it's appropriate to share this quote from Chad that he provided earlier on in this thread:



I still find this fascinating and would have loved to see DC try it. I envision another Jason Todd with a more focused defiance who would force Batman to weigh the ethics of his decisions a lot more extensively. Of course, Warner Bros. never would have gone for it.


The minor details:

- My favorite Breyfogle panel of the issue -- the proud writer of the letter to the editor on page 14. So adorable. Seeing how likeable and sweet she is almost makes you sympathize with Anarky. Then you realize his crusade makes absolutely no sense. Really, it's not even the violence he uses that I find objectionable. He's still not killing.

- Of course, Batman driving the batmobile on page 17 is pretty darn sweet too.

- More on the Anarky identity misdirection (don't read this if you want to be surprised). I absolutely love that Grant and Breyfogle make you suspect Lonnie first on page 18 and THEN shift focus to his dad. So much more crafty than never making you suspect him at all.

-This randomly makes me wonder when the first time was in comics that we were left to wonder about the identity of a costumed character until the end of a story. Clearly, Batman's identity in Detective #27 was unknown until the final page, but it wasn't a mystery that we were baited with and left to guess at. The earliest example I can think of in which the reader was specifically enticed to guess at a character's identity until the end would be Powerman in World's Finest #229.

-Grant seems either to be getting piecemeal information from O'Neil about what's happening in the other title or is trying to clear things up in anticipation for making Anarky the next Robin when he has Bruce say:

"I know, I know -- my own methods aren't always legal, either. But there IS a difference, Alfred...I only use violence when it's absolutely necessary, not as a form of punishment...not lately, anyway"

(my own bolding)

Bruce has not yet clearly worked out this stuff over at the other Batman title.

- Alfred prepares a summary of the major news events for Bruce each morning. Darn good idea.

- In the letters column, a fan points out that, before entering the business, Norm Breyfogle entered a drawing into a contest to design a new Robin costume, and that drawing was published in the back of Batman Family #13. Wish I owned the issue.

- Also in the letters column, Dan Raspler (or whoever writes the responses) talks about the upcoming Legends of the Dark Knight #1 and says, "it should bring a new definition to the word "collector's item." And, indeed, it did. That new definition was "over-hyped, and still worthless twenty years later."

The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence:

We are given a letters to the editor page from the Gotham Gazette with one writer complaining about a heavy metal club making too much noise for residents and another writer complaining about a factory polluting the Gotham River, we see Batman at the metal club, busting a drug dealer who is also the opening act, as the dealer escapes, he runs into Anarky, who electro shocks him into a coma with his staff and sprays "I deal drugs. I kill kids" on the wall above him along with the anarchy symbol, and leaves a clipping from the Gotham Gazette letters to the editor page at the scene, Batman puts two and two together and checks out the writer of the column, a nice old lady who offers no leads, Anarky meditates upon the evils of the current government and the need to heed the peoples' voices, he next goes after the CEO of the company polluting Gotham River, Batman returns home in parallel to Lonnie Machin returning from his paper route, followed by his father, Mike Machin, who complains of having had a restless night. A video is then played on the news, made by Anarky as he dunked the CEO's head into a pale of toxic sludge from his factory, poisoning and nearly killing him, Bruce and Alfred then debate Anarky's ethics and how similar/different they are to Batman's, and Batman reads the next day's Letters to the Editor page, planning a trap for Anarky.


Awesome issue overall, even if Anarky's ideology still thoroughly escapes me. Granted, he's only a kid, but I didn't even understand his thinking when I was a kid.

Batman #442

“A Lonely Place of Dying, Chapter 5: Rebirth”
writer: Marv Wolfman
co-plotter: George Perez
pencils: Jim Aparo
inks: Mike DeCarlo
letters: John Costanza
colors: Adrienne Roy
assoc. editor: Dan Raspler
editor: Denny O’Neil
creator: Bob Kane

grade: B+

It seems to me that Marv Wolfman had to write this issue for two distinct audiences – new/young fans who expected to see Tim become Robin and were excited, and old veteran fans who expected to see Tim become Robin and were skeptical. Marv does his best to write to both audiences in this final installment.

For the young fans, Tim gets to put on the costume, save the day, and fight side by side with Batman and Nightwing.

For the older fans, Tim doesn’t get a definitive “Yes, you can be Robin” by the end of the issue, instead understanding that he will have to prove himself over time and actually earn the role. Wolfman is finally and clearly backing off from the Gary Stu approach to Tim in this issue. And while, in the letters column, O’Neil declares that Tim is, indeed, the third Robin with no subtlety nor tact, Wolfman goes far further to make Tim palatable to wary fans in this issue.

For one thing, it’s solely Tim’s idea to become Robin, with Alfred second guessing himself as he drives Tim to Two Face’s hideout. We’ve come a long way from the previous issue, in which Alfred and Nightwing were clearly pushing Tim (whom they had just met) to take on the role.

For another, Tim nearly gets his butt kicked in his first battle with Two Face, and even then, he’s careful to explain the physical training and karate he’d taken to enable him to somewhat hold his own in battle. Incidentally, I love how Tim pulled out the brick to protect himself from Two Face’s crowbar. While he lacks the innate ability and lifelong training of Dick Grayson, he clearly distinguishes himself by being the smartest of the Robins.

For another still, he has the guts to tell Batman to his face that he’s become reckless without a Robin, not depending upon Alfred or Dick to do his explaining for him.

Then, finally, we’re given this dialogue that seems to run through all the objections to, and rationales for, Batman having another Robin:

Tim: You need someone to make you slow down just a bit and wonder what could happen. I mean, how many times have you been hurt these past months?

Batman: So, for my sake, I should put some child in danger?

Tim: No, that’s not it---

Batman: This ISN’T a discussion.

Tim: Then if not for you – for those criminals you hunt down. You want them to think they can get away with murder? Batman, if they think they can KILL someone like Robin – who are they going to hunt down next? I don’t know why you decided to wear that costume <Really? He knows everything else about Bruce and Dick. He couldn’t trace it all back to Bruce’s parents being killed??> -- but it makes you a symbol. Just as Robin was a symbol. Or Superman, or Nightwing, or the policeman who wears his uniform. And this isn’t just a symbol of the law. It’s a symbol of Justice. When one policeman is killed, others take his place because Justice can’t be stopped. And Batman needs a Robin. No matter what he thinks he wants.


The symbol angle is a new twist, and it’s the one that ultimately wins Bruce over. Of course, it’s not an airtight logic (I’d imagine the real Batman would have countered the policeman example with: “So I should just keep lining up kids in domino masks and watching them die for the sake of preserving a symbol?”), but it’s probably the best rationale any writer could provide for Bruce taking on a new Robin.

Of course, there are the concerns Batman didn’t raise – the fact that Tim has a family and a stable homelife and doesn’t NEED this the way Dick and Jason did, as well as the more important white elephant – the fact that Jason just died doing this. While mentioned earlier, it’s completely ignored here. Tim certainly doesn’t seem as though he’s really considered the risk here, simply playing out a fantasy in order to help out his hero.

Still, it’s the best we’re going to get beyond “I need a new Robin cuz Warner Bros. said so.”


Chronology/continuity issues:

According to Two Face, Robin’s been “hiding for months now,” implying Jason’s death occurred several months ago. If we’re to take Two Face at his word and assume that Jason didn’t go off the radar prior to his death (I’d think the killing of Felipe in the two issues just prior to A Death in the Family must have generated some buzz), then Marv has screwed up again. Dick states in Year 3 that Jason has only been dead for a few weeks, Year 3 took place over a matter of days (three, if I’m not mistaken) and Lonely Place of Dying takes place almost immediately after Year 3.

Also, in the letters column, O’Neil states both that Dark Knight Returns takes place 20 years in the future AND verifies my argument that it is no longer the actual future of this continuity since Batman did not take the path described in DKR (retiring) after Jason died.


The minor details:

Marv seems to have a shaky and ever-changing grasp of Two Face. This time around, he has Two Face explain that the coin provides a sense of systematic procedure, preventing things from falling to chance. Virtually every other writer to tackle Harvey has seemed to approach him from the perspective that he views chance AS the ultimate system of logic and justice – the one thing all else bows to.

He also makes Harvey pretty unthreatening. I mean, the relatively untrained Tim shouts at him from ten feet away, runs up to him, punches him in the face, and initially captures him by doing this. Seriously – all the kid’s done is work out and take karate.

I also enjoyed Two Face saying, “Without procedure there is ANARCHY.” If only this reference had been intentional…

Another missed connection to other Batman titles – all this talk of symbols, and yet the exploration of the Bat symbol in Legends of the Dark Knight seems so far removed from the concept of a brightly colored sidekick. I wish O’Neil had somehow left some room in that story for us to accept the idea that the symbol of the Bat might one day work in conjunction with some other symbol that balances it (Ravens aren’t THAT far removed from Robins…)

Tim claims in this issue that he never wanted to be Robin but is doing so for Batman’s sake. I get that this is another attempt by Wolfman to make him less of a Gary Stu, but I don’t buy it. Any kid who has idolized Batman from youth has dreamt of being Robin.

Aparo’s art is really off in this issue, especially Alfred’s face on page 7. I seriously had to go back to the first page to make sure it was actually Aparo drawing.

Nice (and surprisingly subtle) touch having Tim narrowly avoid being beaten with a crow bar and then blown up with dynamite.

So Bruce Wayne’s butler runs out to save Tim from Two Face, Two Face is clearly eavesdropping when Alfred calls him “Tim,” and Tim refers to saving “Bruce and Dick” in the very next frame. How does an arch villain not store this info away and look into it later?

I always love when, after years of surviving impossible situations, Batman finally gets himself into a trap he can’t escape from just in time for a sidekick to make their debut. Last time we saw this was when Nocturna flirted with being a superhero way back in the Doug Moench days and had to rescue Batman and Robin from near-death (and, as much as that’s my favorite Batman run of all time, Nocturna as a superhero was a TERRIBLE idea).

When Tim tells Bruce he’s like to come and learn from him, Wolfman missed a valuable opportunity. It would have been so great to have Tim use a line that was reminiscent of Bruce seeking out Harvey Harris as a young unwanted apprentice in the recently published Detective Annual #2. It would have been cool for Bruce to see something of himself in Tim as a primary reason for his taking him on. After all, Tim seems to be capable of Batman’s level of intellect and passion to expand his knowledge.

Is it just me, or does Nightwing seem so much cooler as the “older brother” when a Robin is around?

Wolfman completely abandoned the parallel he’d been weaving between Bruce and Harvey in this final chapter. Sure, company will help Bruce keep himself sane, but at least acknowledge this somewhere in the issue! Two Face was a big enough deal to be Bruce’s foil in the other chapters of this story, but now he’s nothing more than a joke in this one.

I’m assuming the “Joker” we see a cameo of at the end is the imposter Joker that will soon be turning up in the title. I do love how much fun DC has had teasing us with Joker’s return, first in the Secret Origins Special, then in making us think Harvey was The Joker in Batman #440, and now this. GREAT misdirection, incidentally, as the voice he heard in #400 WAS the Joker – we just thought it was Harvey’s internal dialogue.


The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence:

Tim worries that Bruce and Dick haven’t come back so he decides to save them as Robin, Alfred reluctantly assists him, he confronts Two Face and is narrowly saved from Jason’s fate (crowbar and dynamite) by Alfred, Tim rescues Bruce and Dick, Bruce is understandably skeptical about Tim wearing the Robin costume, but Tim makes his case and had the foresight to plant a tracker on Two Face, so Bruce allows him to tag along for the moment, he proves himself again by thinking quickly when Two Face uses a wrecking ball to knock a pile of cars in a junkyard onto the Batmobile, Bruce and Dick easily stop Two Face, back at the mansion Bruce agrees to give Tim a chance to prove himself (no clear commitment to make him a Robin), and we discover it was the Joker manipulating Two Face through that radio (or was it?)


Look, creating Tim Drake and making him a third Robin was a TERRIBLE idea, but it was also an inevitability, and I feel Wolfman finally did his best in this issue to make that inevitability work. The Gary Stu aspect of Tim is finally gone, though he’s still just a little too perfect, and I truly respect Wolfman not allowing Tim to become Robin right away. This made me furious as a kid reading this issue, and I’m sure it didn’t please Warner Bros. that much either, but it was the right call for the more mature reading audience. No way Bruce would jump right into something like this so quickly.

If only Wolfman hadn’t suddenly turned Two Face into such a joke this issue. We always knew he wasn’t the real heart of this story, but suddenly diminishing the threat he poses and treating him like a secondary problem in order give more attention to Tim was just insulting, as well as a clear example of poor internal consistency.

Legends of the Dark Knight #2

"Shaman, Book Two"
writer: Dennis O'Neil
pencils: Edward Hannigan
inks: John Beatty
letters: John Costanza
colors: Richmond Lewis
asst. editor: Kevin Dooley
editor: Andrew Helfer
Batman created by Bob Kane

grade: B

I have to admit that I'm starting to enjoy this story, and yet, at the same time, I absolutely see what O'Neil is trying to do with this story, and it annoys me. So I'm pretty much going to have to compartmentalize my feelings on this issue.

First, the good. This issue is beautiful. It holds back for so long as we watch Bruce Wayne, but then explodes into vibrant images and colors as soon as he emerges as Batman and the sky grows dark. Hannigan, Beatty, and Lewis are a force to be reckoned with in this issue, truly legitimizing the power of the prestige format comic book. I've always preferred good old fashioned newsprint, but you just wouldn't...couldn't enjoy these images in the same way using that format. Wow.

Also, while it's totally inconsistent with literally ANY other post-Crisis writer's depiction of Batman (except, possibly, Max Collins), I enjoy Bruce's playfulness and clear good-guy nature in this story. He jokes with Alfred, uses Sunday School scripture to gently put a religious zealot in his place, gently kisses his female companion on the head before refusing her advances, and even invites Alfred into his world as a near-partner, exploring the cave with him and expressing his innermost thoughts without reservation. I like this guy and wish O'Neil had made this characterization of Batman come through in the Post-Crisis. Of course, he was the editor who attempted to shape the entire post-Crisis Batman around Dark Knight Returns because it sold, selling out on Batman in the process. And I guess that leads me to what angers me about this issue...


The bad:

- This is O'Neil's shameless attempt to own the post-Crisis Batman's origin to a greater extent than Miller. First he added his own little twists to the Year One origin in the previous issue (including why Bruce "really" chose to become a bat and introducing this story's conflict in Batman's first night out), and now he's essentially depicting Year 1.5, showing the construction of the Bat Cave, and shamelessly and repeatedly referring back to Year One (and once to DKR) in an attempt to closely align this book with the core fan favorites that are now defining the essential post-Crisis Batman origin story. It's a cheap stunt to boost the importance of, and positive fan response to, this story. In other words, "If you liked Year One and DKR, then you must like this! And then you'll see -- it was ME...ME who contributed the most to the new Batman origin story! Muhwahaha!!!!"

- On page 11, O'Neil tries to imply that Gordon suspects Bruce is Batman, and yet he completely railroaded over Sam Hamm's attempt to do this with "Blind Justice," outright declaring in the letters column that Gordon did not suspect Bruce Wayne was Batman. But now he does...because O'Neil wants to write it that way.

- And, of course, O'Neil inserts his fictional island of Santa Prisca into a Batman story once again. At least he's not forcing Richard Dragon and Lady Shiva down our throats anymore. Oh, wait. The Robin mini-series...


And now the minor details:

- Seriously? Another religious zealot in Gotham? It's only been two years since that horrible Glorious Godfrey/Legends storyline.

- So the name "Lukas Wilson" is suspicious because "Tina Wilson" was the girl who killed herself six months earlier. Surely, two different black people both named Wilson can't be a coincidence.

- Bruce and Alfred discuss putting computers in the Batcave, but Wolfman established that Bruce didn't start using computers in the cave until Year 3.

The plot synopsis in one ridiculously long sentence:

It is now six months later, a human sacrifice cult has moved into Gotham from Santa Prisca and seems to be the source of Gotham's new drug trade, they have some connection to "Chubala," (what the girl who killed herself in the previous issue said), we meet Tobias Micah, a reformed pickpocket turned cult Christian leader, Dr. Spurlock (who Bruce funded to research Alaskan native tribes) has returned with the shaman mask used to cure Bruce, and he shares the story of the bat that Bruce confidentially shared with him on public television, his assistant keeps trying to talk to Bruce but Spurlock keeps them apart, Batman protects a police officer in critical condition after stumbling upon the cult from a bunch of criminals ordered to kill him, Bruce connects one of them to the girl who killed herself six months earlier, he and Alfred start building the Batcave, Batman gets more info from Gordon about the cult coming from Santa Prisca and being involved in the drug trade, and Bruce finally gets around to meeting with Spurlock's assistant only to discover he's been killed.


Loved the art, liked the characterization, want to hurt O'Neil for being O'Neil.

The Post-movie Batman Industry


In May of 1989, it cost fans exactly $1.50 to keep up with Batman each month. Batman and Detective Comics, his two regular titles, were priced at 75 cents a piece and arrived promptly at comic spinners and local shops each month.

In June of 1989, the Batman movie debuted. At the same time, the Batman comics temporarily went bi-weekly, doubling the expense of keeping up with Batman to $3 a month.

In July, the temporary bi-weekly schedule remained AND cover prices jumped to $1 an issue, essentially raising the monthly cost of keeping up with Batman to $4 a month.

By October, the bi-weekly schedule was gone, but a third Batman title was added, this one produced in prestige format, allowing DC to charge $1.50 per issue. The new permanent cost of keeping up with Batman = $3.50 per month.

In that same month, a stand alone graphic novel (Arkham Asylum) was released, first in costly hardcover and then in the still amazingly pricey $14.99 softcover edition. Only a month later, yet another graphic novel was released (Gotham by Gaslight) at a less expensive $3.95 price.

And, on top of this, there was suddenly a wealth of tpbs reprinting all the recent hot Batman stories (had reprint trades been at all common place before this?), reprinting DKR, Year One, Killing Joke, A Death in the Family, and Blind Justice.


I have to believe the purpose of flooding the market like this was two-fold. The first reason, obviously, was to cash in on the Batman craze. The second only becomes more obvious when you consider the subtle options fans were presented with -- buy the more expensive third Batman title if it isn't in present-day continuity? Buy all 5 cover editions of the same story? Buy Arkham Asylum in hardback or softcover? Buy the $14.95 Arkham Asylum gn or the $3.95 Gotham by Gaslight one? Or buy them all.

It seems to me that DC was testing how much modern fans were willing to spend on Batman. Whereas fans of the generation before would scream if cover prices jumped from 20 to 25 cents, this new breed of fans couldn't seem to get enough of Batman, and DC wanted to know if there was any limit to that demand.

Apparently not.

The graphic novels and tpb reprints continued.

In 1990, DC added the Robin mini-series which, while limited in its run, was succeeded by two more minis and finally an official fourth Batman-related ongoing title.

In 1991, DC added a wealth of new miniseries and trades having Batman cross-over with non-DC properties, including Judge Dredd, Predator, and Dracula.

In 1992, DC dared to add yet a 5th Batman monthly title, Shadow of the Bat. The Batman Adventures title was also launched to appeal to younger audiences.

In 1993, DC added Catwoman as a permanent monthly title, as well as the permanent monthly Robin title to take the place of the yearly minis. That makes 7th monthly Batman and Batman-related titles to keep up with, all while graphic novels, trade paperbacks, and limited series remained prevalent. Add to this yet another jump in cover prices ($1.25) and Batman going bi-weekly once again for the overly hyped Knightfall event.

And, while the Batman Industry kept growing from there, let's stop at 1993 for convenience's sake and take one final snapshot for comparison:

cost to follow Batman per month in May 1989:
- Detective Comics #601: $0.75
- Batman #435: $0.75

Total: $1.50
Approx cost to keep up with Batman for a full year: $18


cost to follow Batman per month in May 1993:
-Batman #496: $1.25
-Batman #497: $1.25
-Batman Adventures #9: $1.25
-Batman: Legends of the Dark Knight #47: $1.75
-Batman: Shadow of the Bat #14: $1.75
-Batman: Shadow of the Bat Annual #1: $3.50
-Detective Comics #662: $1.25
-Detective Comics #663: $1.25
-Showcase '93 (featuring Robin): $1.95

Total: $15.20
Approx. cost to keep up with Batman for a full year: $182


That's more than 10 times the cost of four years earlier! (and this is a few months BEFORE Catwoman and Robin both launch). And, with all that extra cost, were fans truly getting 10x the quality in their storytelling?

Perhaps the larger question is this -- was this simply a case of supply meeting demand, or had it finally evolved into an issue of supply driving demand, as eager fans looking to keep up with Batman felt compelled to purchase the majority of these products, not because they wanted them, but because they didn't want to miss out?