When you stare into the abyss... it laughs right in your face

[eumelia]

	I received 71 credits on The Sci Fi Sounds Quiz How much of a Sci-Fi geek are you?
Quiz by SheGoddess: quick weight loss

Well, now that that's established maybe we can go on to Meta?

On today's agenda, you ask.

A wee bit more on The Dark Knight, as I'm eagerly awaiting my Iron Man DVD Ultimate Edition to arrive and will probably watch it over and over for in order to write a more cohesive mini-thesis about Tony Stark's Gender Fluidity in the movie.
And as soon as I have the Nolanverse Batman DVD's I'll be able to write a more comprehensive comparative analysis of Iron Man and Batman.
Hopefully deeper than this Player vs Player strip:


My brother however, sent me two interesting articles about the nature of Batman and the Joker as they've been presented in the Nolanverse which, as most comic books readers know, is quite different from the sequential art mythology.
The two articles, written by two of the members of the Vulpes Libris collective, one of whom (the one who wrote the Joker article) admits to being a newcomer to graphic literature, a "noob" in their words. Both have some very interesting insights on the Hero and the Nemesis.

Having read those two reviews I feel compelled to comment, not on the articles themselves (which are worth reading, hence them being linked above), but on the implication of Batman and the Joker being, oppositional forces, forced to do this danse macabre(1) until one of them dies, which is the comic book myth is unlikely.

I think it's very simplistic and reductive to say that Batman is a Hero in the archetype sense of the word. The articles details various incarnations of "Batman" in myths and stories - including Hercules, Odysseus and Harry Potter.
While modern day Super Heroes have certainly replaces the heroes of old mythology in their function of (re)telling the Way of the World, I don't feel it's right to compare them in their characters.
While Bruce and Odysseus certainly have the an ingenuity that gives them an edge on their enemies, they are two quite different personality types.
Also Bruce Wayne and Harry Potter *snort* and I like Harry Potter!
And yes, I know, niggling.
Functionally and archtypically they share characteristics and when it comes to myth that is probably the most important bit.

But then, why is Batman so popular? Ridiculously so.
I mean The Dark Knight went on to be the highest grossing movie of the summer, I mean hype dies down after the first two weeks and there's usually an sink after the first ebb.
But this was just a cinematic phenomena!
I went on to see it five times, which is a hell of a lot for me (and earning crazy looks from my family, films are not cheap, especially if you want to go to a good cinema).
This is not just movie wise, Batman is still DC's best seller in monthly issues and in trades and if I'm not mistaken, it's also the best seller in mainstream comics over-all.

There's something compelling about a man, who pretends to be a monster, in order to avoid becoming one.
In Arkham Asylum: A serious house on a serious earth, Grant Morrison and Dave McKean take this idea and expand it in a horrific (effing fantastic!) way.
The Joker isn't so much a Nemesis, but a guide; The Cheshire Cat to Batman's Alice.
Regardless, Batman is pinned against his greatest fear, becoming The Monster.

This is similarly done in the film, mainly through the Joker's own sense of grandeur. He truly believes that his "games" will free humans of their measly societal constraints.
Too bad he's a psychopath.

Do you like that?
There shall be more.
Alas, my train of thought has been slightly severed.
Worry not loyal readers, I shall write more on this oh so interminable subject.

Notes
(1)a musical piece I always associated with the Joker, and is especially apropos for Nolan's Joker.

Comments

[sabrina-il.livejournal.com]

I always thought, from my shallow knowledge of the comic book world, that the reason Batman and Spiderman were so popular were because they were fundamewntally "wrong" for their creators/companies. Out of all of DC's superheroes, Batman is the only one who has a dark side of any kind. And that gets suppressed as much as possible in almost all of his collaborative titles. DC is famous for (and we're not talking Vertigo or their smaller titles in general, but the bid JLA people) for stories about good and evil in bright shiny colors. There's always the epic battle between light and dark. Batman is the only one of their characters who muddies things up a bit and gets closer to the dark side than anyone else. That makes him unusual and interesting.

Spiderman is sort of similar with Marvel. Marvel's big idea was to create character-focused drama. Good and Evil is just a backdrop, in some cases the only difference between the villain and hero is a shift in POV (unlike in DC where you're often dealing with Absolute Evil), the main focus is the characters involved. At least that's the general idea. And then ther's spider man, who's a very classic super hero and any way you twist and turn it, he's still dealing with psychos and weirdos half the time. Again this in unusual.

Now, personally, in terms of titles I actually read instead of sort of following through scans_daily) I pretty much only go near Vertigo cos that's the stuff I like (sort of like the HBO of comics) and so I am not at all greately knowledgeable, but that's the general idea as I've gathered so far.

I realize this I'm talking about a sociological POV here whereas you were talking about something philosphy-psychology related, but you asked But then, why is Batman so popular? and that's a question that I've written articles in my own head about as well, so I couldn't not share, y'know?

[omnivorously.livejournal.com]

I like this post : )

Batman and Odysseus are nothing alike. Among many other things, Odysseus has no compunction about killing people who fuck around with him and his family; Batman's whole thing is that he won't kill people.

I've heard about the Arkham Asylum thing, really ought to get my hands on it. Gah, can't afford it right now : (

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

I too am mainly a Vertigo reader, as it is the medium and genre that I like, rather than the superhero sub-genre.
However, the DC Big Three (and some of their friends) have always held some kind of fascination for me.
I've been a Bat-Fan since the early 90's and he has changed a lot in the past decade and a half.
You theory of Wrongness has merit, though I'm not sure it's that, because dark sides are quite abundant in the DC Universe, Superman may seem happy-go-lucky, but he's had his own share of darkness come out of him.
Batman, in my reading, doesn't really have a Dark Side per-se, it's more of him trying to find some kind of light within him.
What makes him different from other DC characters is mainly the fact that he is human and relies on tech, gadgetry and brains, others have some kind of edge.
Though the same could be said about Green Arrow, so why is he such a marginal character compared to Batman's status.

I'll get back to you on that, as I think this comment will be part of the next entry on the subject :)

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

Ta very much!

That's exactly it! Also, Harry Potter, puh-lease! Bah. I hate that kind of reductionist thinking!

You really, really should. The story is great and the art is beyond magnificent. People have complained that the art doesn't enable them to get into the story. To me that's the mark of how spoon fed we as readers have become to the graphic genre. A reader should work hard in order to get what's going on.
Doesn't your library carry comic books?

Oh, noes, a tangent!

[bacchae23.livejournal.com]

Oediseus = Batsy?

Very, very interesting idea, and to some extent I find myself seeing that the comparison somewhat work.

There may be many reasons that Bruce Wayne dons the cape and cowl, and while it's always easy to say that it's to prevent what happened to his parents and make the world better (etc), I imagine that there are many other factors playing into it, as well. The only real example I can give is the relationship between Bats and the Joker.

Though he doesn't kill him because -- you're right -- the Joker is essentially his Guide, I've always had an idea that some of not killing the Joker is Bruce's own hubris. While he despises the Joker and everything the psychopath has taken from his life, in some sick, twisted way I think a subconscious part of him might recognize that you get rid of this guy, and all the big villains are gone.

Not to say that Bruce Wayne is a complete asshole/egoist/I-do-this-for-the-chicks-and-the-money kind of guy, but I do think, to some extent, that the Joker stays alive because to kill him would be to get rid of a great enemy.

That's the only real resemblance I can see between Oediseus and the Bat is some kind of hubris...though Oediseus' idea of "Hey, I'm gonna make fun of the cyclopes, nananananana, you can't catch me!" kills his men and Bat's idea of "can't kill the dude 'cuz it goes against what I stand for" kills the people close to him. And, granted, Oediseus usually kills his enemies while Batman trundles them to Arkham's revolving-door.

And, granted, Oediseus has some gods gambling on him to suck or do well.

And, granted, the Bat has a butler who makes his dinner for him.

BUT STILL. I DO KINDA SEE A ITSY-BITSY RESEMBLANCE.

and good post. Yay for fangirl nerdiness.

Re: Oh, noes, a tangent!

[(Anonymous)]

Hey there, this is Kirsty from Vulpes Libris. I just felt I should point out that only the first article was mine. The second, on Batman, was written by Kari Maaren who is very definitely not a noob. Glad you enjoyed them both!

Re: Oh, noes, a tangent!

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

Oh, thanks for the info and for coming to read.

Will edit the for corrections.

Re: Oh, noes, a tangent!

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

Thanks for reading!

Fangirl geekery indeed!