Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Comic Books >

Frank Miller, Jim Lee: The Goddamn Batman

Page: 1 2(3)4 5 6 7 8... 11

miss wonderstarr

09:17 / 11.01.05

I'm not starting another "argument" here, but I've heard the accusation before that Miller's Batman is fascist. I'm not sure that I see it. In what way is he fascist?

10:18 / 11.01.05

I've also read and heard opinions that the Watchman is quite right wing too.

Perhaps it's a result of the era that they were written in.

12:33 / 11.01.05

Just because Beau Smith is a bad writer doesn't mean his comment about Miller revisiting practically the same theme(s) over and over in pretty much the same voice and style can't have validity.

>> I won't hammer this particular debate too much further though, as I don't see it going anywhere productive.

That was pretty much my point about the discussion - debates where both sides have passionately detailed their sides for a while and neither seems to be budging have kind of had their go and may as well agree to disagree. I meant 'argument' in the classic spirited debate sense.

Ronin is about a warrior from the past who slashes and kills his way through a cold scientific repressive future while seducing and bonding with a woman from the present. Elektra - assassin carving her way through many many people while resisting mind control and trying to prevent the AntiChrist from rising to power. Give Me Liberty, one super-tough heroine who never gives up fighting almost single-handedly against a corrupt corporate government. Hard Boiled - guy made into a cyborg assassin and mistreated by his evil masters slashes and kills his way to some sort of freedom.

Lots of similar themes in there. I'm not de-valuing Miller's work, but just saying he does really revisit the same themes in that hardboiler crime noir style over and over again. Sure, all superhero stories have that sense of a hero with an unbreakable spirit who never gives up and fights against impossible odds, but Miller's really hit those points home and in a certain unique Milleresque style.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

13:47 / 11.01.05

"Fascist" might be putting it a little strongly... but there's definitely an element of that to Miller's Batman- criminals being, as we all know, a superstitious, cowardly lot, they must be crushed using force of arms. I think Miller (in DKR, at least) explores the notion rather than waving a flag for it- he shows us the man, riddled with insecurities and lumbered with an old, decaying body, behind the iron glove.

I think in the case of Watchmen, it was more an examination of the tendency towards Fascism in the superhero genre (when you start with the Nietzschean Superman, there's bound to be some kind of thread running through your whole genre)- the Comedian, Rorschach- even the misguided Veidt, using a Utopian end to justify some particularly unpleasant means.

In other news, I think DKR's portrayal of Supes (I never used to call him that before, but now I have the notion that every time you do, John Byrne cries, he's Supes every time) is among my favourites- he's the Godlike being, more a force of nature than a character, right up until he detonates the bomb "harmlessly" over the desert, when you realise that he's fully, painfully aware of the fact that, even as an alien god, you can't just make everything alright, because life's not like that. The two extremes are for me, what make Superman a great character when he's done well, and personally I think this was a class piece of work.

14:22 / 11.01.05

That was pretty much my point about the discussion - debates where both sides have passionately detailed their sides for a while and neither seems to be budging have kind of had their go and may as well agree to disagree.

I gonna have to drag this out.
Finder, of course Kovacs isn't going to budge. Miles hasn't actually articulated an argument. Sure, he's told us how he feels - he's even told us how he feels about a few specific things - but he hasn't entered into anything approaching a debate.
Okay, granted, maybe those of us that disagree with him should just leave him alone as he seems to have got himself rather worked up, but I'm not sure Kovacs was pushing things by asking for arguments as opposed to assertions. As I understand it, Kovacs only asked the once before Miles went off the deep end.

I will, however, concede that Kovacs could have been a little more polite.

14:41 / 11.01.05

"Fascist" might be putting it a little strongly... but there's definitely an element of that to Miller's Batman- criminals being, as we all know, a superstitious, cowardly lot, they must be crushed using force of arms. I think Miller (in DKR, at least) explores the notion rather than waving a flag for it- he shows us the man, riddled with insecurities and lumbered with an old, decaying body, behind the iron glove.

i think there's a fascist element to Batman in general - he's a hooded vigilante who keeps the rabble in line with theatrical displays of his crushing, overlordly might, for chrissakes. i don't think Miller intends to really endorse that, per se, but to his credit he at the very least doesn't run from it either, whereas most people before him did.

where it gets tricky, for me, is the introduction of a literally subhuman element to Gotham City: the Mutants. are we meant to take the story of Batman crushing the Untermenschen with his Bat-tank ironically, as a critique of Batman's fascist subtext? straight, as an endorsement of that subtext? is it meant to be ambiguous? i want to re-read DKR soon.

I think in the case of Watchmen, it was more an examination of the tendency towards Fascism in the superhero genre (when you start with the Nietzschean Superman, there's bound to be some kind of thread running through your whole genre)- the Comedian, Rorschach- even the misguided Veidt, using a Utopian end to justify some particularly unpleasant means.

i would go further and say that Watchmen is a critique of the superhero as an authoritarian power fantasy.

I will, however, concede that Kovacs could have been a little more polite.

i don't think it's productive to point any fingers at either party, but the whole "argument" produced a lot of heat and not a lot of light. for my $0.02, pissing contests without content like this don't really belong here, and i fault both parties for responding to each other's insults rather than ignoring them and moving on to a more substantive discussion.

not that i haven't been guilty of that sort of thing in the past myself, mind you.

miss wonderstarr

17:55 / 11.01.05

"Fascist" might be putting it a little strongly... but there's definitely an element of that to Miller's Batman- criminals being, as we all know, a superstitious, cowardly lot, they must be crushed using force of arms. I think Miller (in DKR, at least) explores the notion rather than waving a flag for it- he shows us the man, riddled with insecurities and lumbered with an old, decaying body, behind the iron glove.

I think in the case of Watchmen, it was more an examination of the tendency towards Fascism in the superhero genre (when you start with the Nietzschean Superman, there's bound to be some kind of thread running through your whole genre)- the Comedian, Rorschach- even the misguided Veidt, using a Utopian end to justify some particularly unpleasant means.

What I think these, and other comments here point out is that Miller and Moore were only exploring "fascist" elements inherent in the whole concept of the superhero, and variations of that template within the superhero pantheon (vigilante taking law into own hands = Batman/Rorschach / incredibly powerful alien shaping human destiny = Superman/Manhattan).

I have "fascist" in quotes because I'm not sure if this is really a correct use of the word. I'm no historian and am not entirely confident of what the word strictly means, beyond the obvious, everyday notion that it's what Hitler was. So I'm hesitant to go with the knee-jerk reaction that someone using a tank to crush crime is a fascist, without being sure what the word implies.

The Mutants aren't depicted as a sub-species. They become the Sons of Batman... they're just a subcultural phase, sub not implying inferior in this sense, and the youth of Gotham quickly move onto another fad once their leader's downed and another potential leader steps up.

Re. my exchange with Laimling, I think if you re-read my last post to him, you will find it quite measured and polite rather than a tit-for-tat of insults. I tried merely to say "you're being abusive" rather than respond in kind.

Anyway, that kind of spat makes boards more lively.

Suedey! SHOT FOR MEAT!

18:26 / 11.01.05

Or not.

19:04 / 11.01.05

I have "fascist" in quotes because I'm not sure if this is really a correct use of the word. I'm no historian and am not entirely confident of what the word strictly means, beyond the obvious, everyday notion that it's what Hitler was. So I'm hesitant to go with the knee-jerk reaction that someone using a tank to crush crime is a fascist, without being sure what the word implies.

i'm not going to go into it here, but the narrative of the hard, self-disciplined man circumventing ineffective/corrupt civil authorities so as to be able to deliver righteous violence upon the inherently cowardly, crude, and violent hordes which would otherwise drag society down into anarchy is a core fascist narrative. i'm surprised you haven't dealt more with Batman-as-fascist-archetype before, since it seems to be one of the two main takes on the character that i've seen addressed from an academic perspective (the other being Batman-as-campy-gay-icon).

The Mutants aren't depicted as a sub-species. They become the Sons of Batman... they're just a subcultural phase, sub not implying inferior in this sense, and the youth of Gotham quickly move onto another fad once their leader's downed and another potential leader steps up.

i will re-read, because that's not the impression i had. for now, i will defer to you, since you are "Dr. Batman," and all.

Anyway, that kind of spat makes boards more lively.

Or not.

i'm with you there, Suedehead.

miss wonderstarr

19:48 / 11.01.05

Well, I just don't know so much about fascism. Discussing Batman as fascist might be a common academic approach -- I haven't really come across it much -- but Batman as homoerotic is, I would argue, a far more important line of interpretation as it runs from 1950s teen readings through Wertham's still-notorious 1954 book through official attempts at containment of any gayness (Dick sent to college, dead Alfred, Bat-Girl, Batwoman, Batgirl) and the camp of the 1966 series right up to Schumacher's two movies and the Ambiguously Gay Duo. The joke that Batman and Robin have something going on is incredibly well-known among the general public and doesn't seem like it's ever going to die. The idea that Batman is a fascist doesn't have anything like the same kind of power among non-comics-readers, in my opinion.

Personally I suspect that the theory of superheroes as fascist might have a lot to do with the simple fact that "Superman" seems to tally on a linguistic level with the Nietzschean "Ubermensch", even though the connection might be pretty tenous in terms of what Nietzsche wrote and what Siegel and Schuster created. I am pretty sure that Fredric Wertham made that link between Superman and Nietzsche -- he also accused the Blue Beetle of being like Kafka's "Metamorphosis", ie. he made a lot of snap judgements based on misunderstandings.

As far as "Dr Batman" goes, you can get a PhD in the cultural history of Batman and not know everything, by any stretch of the imagination, about Batman, as my posts will amply demonstrate. A degree of critical expertise doesn't mean encyclopaedic knowledge. So I'm sure you could be right and I could be wrong, but I'd always ask -- as I did with Laimling -- for the other person to support their counter-argument.

And re. that "spat" again, to be fair I took a lot of silly abuse then moved on, on this page, to discuss entirely on-topic issues about Batman, so I don't think it's appropriate to give me any more trouble about that.

miss wonderstarr

20:08 / 11.01.05

posted another reply, Barbelith crashed. so here goes again

The Mutants aren't depicted as a sub-species. They become the Sons of Batman... they're just a subcultural phase, sub not implying inferior in this sense, and the youth of Gotham quickly move onto another fad once their leader's downed and another potential leader steps up.

I was basing this idea on the fight between Batman and Billy Berserk, pp.44-46 of "Dark Knight Triumphant".

On p.44 the Mutants are clearly shifting allegiance without much loyalty, simply siding with the strongest figure at the time. "Leader peg Batman, you see." Three panels later: "My mon Bats don't shiv. You see."

On p.46, when Batman's won, the Mutants are already taking off their shades, a key sign of their subculture.

The first panel we see after that is the debut of the Sons of Batman, a new gang announcing that the Mutants are dead.

I was assuming that most of the Mutants immediately ditched the old style, now the leader was down and it was no longer the toughest outfit in town, and that they became SoBs.

This notion -- that Miller was trying to suggest the ephemerality of youth cultures -- is supported by the fact that we see Rob and Don, Mutants in "Triumphant", as Nazi goons at the very start of "Hunt the Dark Knight", just a few pages on.

HOWEVER! I forgot that there is a sizeable contingent of Mutants left, and that they stage a jailbreak in "Dark Knight Falls"... they only join with the SoBs when Batman forcibly encourages them to. Confusingly, on page 30 of that book, Don seems to be a Mutant again.

So, I'd say I was part right.

00:42 / 12.01.05

Oh, Peter Milligan said the same thing about Miller, a while before Beau Smith (who's not someone I'm terribly interested in) prob'ly. In an internet review on what was the best Milligan page on the web, don't think it's there now. (Aside: there's really fuck-all good internet resources on Milligan.)

FinderWolf boils it down, but you're really talking about 'One Man's War', wherein said man goes and kicks fuck out of everything in his way - see DKR, 'Born Again', the first Sin City and Ronin for other examples.

I suspect, and I have no grounds for it really, that the problem many have with DK2 is that it is, partly, not quite this story, and a bit campier in several ways (although J'Onn dies/is dying of of cancer - SICKENER.)

I thought Miller's proposed return Batman title 'Batman vs. the Terrorists' would be interesting for exploring the ascribed fascist ethic.

14:02 / 12.01.05

Yeah, DK2 is part weird bright, shiny Silver Age loving tribute and part camp. Strange...

>> FinderWolf boils it down, but you're really talking about 'One Man's War', wherein said man goes and kicks fuck out of everything in his way - see DKR, 'Born Again', the first Sin City and Ronin for other examples.

Yeah, this nails it even better.

Apparently Batman vs. The Terrorists has been renamed Batman: Holy War.

So now we'll have 2 Frank Miller Batman pieces coming out this year. Interesting...

15:06 / 12.01.05

heh, so the mutant leader's called billy berserk. never put that into place before. i'm trying to remember if the tv screen with the joker copycat mutants is before or after joker buys it in chapter three. dk2 is just this story again, kids following trends, only some trends can stick and be important, if the symbol inspiring them is energetic enough. dk2 is a bit camp, but so is dk1. there has never been a superhero comic that's not a bit camp, nor will there be. best not to worry.

15:27 / 12.01.05

Super hero books are camp? What's camp about men in tights fighting each other? Oh wait, now I see.
Best not to worry? How can I now I realise that reading superhero comics might turn me, y'know... gay.
I'm horrified and am never reading a comic again.
Seriously though, "Parliament" by Michael Avon Oeming and some other guy (can't remember his name, sorry) was an interesting take on the superhero as fascist, or at least what would make someone think he was worthy of setting himself up as a vigilante.

miss wonderstarr

22:42 / 12.01.05

I think Billy Berserk cropped up again in Bryan Talbot's LOTDK, "Masks".

The DKR Batman guest-starred in Batman vs Planetary.

Erm... just trivia really.

00:50 / 13.01.05

I think DK2 is quite a bit camper than DK1. But I also like it a bit more.

Most FM comics are decidedly uncamp I think.

Maybe not 'Born Again'.

A

01:52 / 13.01.05

Just to clarify my earlier comments- I don't think Miller was "endorsing" fascism or anything like that. I just thought after reading it (which I haven't done for ages, so I'll be hard pressesd to come up with any examples or anything) that Miller's Batman was quite a bit more cold, cruel and brutal than Batman, as I understand the character, is. It's certainly a valid and interesting interpretation of the character, but it's one that I think is too far from what I understand the core concept of Batman as, for me to consider it to be the "definitive" version.

(For me, it's a little like when Superman killed Zod and those other Kryptonians, despite the fact that Superman NEVER KILLS. You just sort of have to say "Well, actually, that's not what Superman would do.")

Also, I think I first heard Mark Millar refer to Batman as a fascist (although I could be wrong). From memory, he said something along the lines of the core concept of Batman is that he's "a rich fascist in tights").

07:33 / 13.01.05

the fascistthing is pretty straightforward really - he uses the simple fact of his own will, agency and mental scars to make himself the final moral arbiter of his city, and on tuesdays when he hangs out with his fetish pals on the moon, of the world.

Haus of Mystery

11:03 / 13.01.05

Also, I think I first heard Mark Millar refer to Batman as a fascist (although I could be wrong). From memory, he said something along the lines of the core concept of Batman is that he's "a rich fascist in tights")

Ahh Millar - king of the reductionist soundbite.

i think Miller's DK is a linear successor to Bob Kane's early vision of Batman, himself a fairly cold brutal sort. I thought the point of DKR was that whilst it is a politcal story to a degree (the cold war paranoia that looms throughout) it is ultimately about legends, and icons. Batman is less a fascist than a general at the end, mobilising a disefranchised group of youths to reclaim their city. Certainly this riffs on fascism knowingly, but lets not forget that they are preventing Gotham from becoming a chaotic warzone. They are their to save lives. Neither right nor left is given much creedence in Miller's story, both satirised heavily in the vox popping populace. as I think Gumbitch said earlier some trends can stick and be important, and in this case it's being a superhero.

11:04 / 13.01.05

Duncan the quote you were looking for was this...

"PM: One thing about Frank Miller -- I think he has one story. He's very good at telling that story, but Frank Miller has one story. He tells that over and over and over again --he does it very well-- but it's one story, and I think that it's a story that suits superheroes, I think that he can...get carried away. But I think that Frank Miller is incredibly adult and incredibly sophisticated. I think that Frank Miller is great at what he does, but it's one story, and it suits superheroes, because his story is the story of the the male lone hero. That's his story. And it's a classic, mythic, story. It's the lone male. Hemingway wrote about the lone male. It's a basic kind of human architypal character."

More in links.

http://members.tripod.com/~sheckley/Milligan/interview1.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~sheckley/Milligan/interview2.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~sheckley/Milligan/interview3.htm

It's a pretty good interview actually. The only decent one out of the handful you can find online.

12:49 / 13.01.05

Ah, cheers, it's still there.

It is a good one that.

19:32 / 13.01.05

Certainly this riffs on fascism knowingly, but lets not forget that they are preventing Gotham from becoming a chaotic warzone.

but that scenario, in itself, is created by Miller. it's easy to lose sight of the fact that nothing just "happens to be" anything in a work of fiction: it's either set up that way deliberately or it's a tacit assumption deeply built into the artist's point of view.

Miller constructs a Gotham City which is an urban space which needs strongmen to keep it from collapsing into chaos, which overlaps heavily with fascist ideology, which similarly constructs society as a whole as needing such strongmen to prevent a collapse into chaos (and Jewish moral corruption, Bolshevism, etc etc).

this is like when people try to argue that Tolkien's not a racist because orcs in his fictional world "really are" inferior, and it's thus justifiable to treat them accordingly, missing the fact that they only "really are" that way because that's how Tolkien chose to create them.

Haus of Mystery

20:11 / 13.01.05

Fair points all, but I think Miller is being more playful than Tolkien was. I may be wrong, but I find it hard to believe he entirely endorses Batman's worldview, just as Garth Ennis doesn't with the Punisher.

Haus of Mystery

20:13 / 13.01.05

Also: does Superman not take the roll of the 'ubermensch'an unquestioning tool of the State while Batman is more the self-determinist?
(I may be off here Diz, just mulling ideas over...)

02:42 / 15.01.05

1. Nietzsche wasn't exactly a fascist.

2. The ubermensch is pretty much the exact opposite of a "tool of the State," being an entirely "self-determined" figure. So in a way, DK's Batman is the real ubermensch, going toe-to-toe with Superman.

Haus of Mystery

12:11 / 15.01.05

Fair enough - my working knowledge of fascism comes off the back of cereal boxes and cartoons, so I'm on fairly shaky ground.

miss wonderstarr

12:33 / 15.01.05

I want to use this public thread to apologise to Miles Laimling for the argument above. It was unnecessary of me to lay into you like that, and in fact your negative views about DKR made me think usefully about the lack of consensus around this book.

Haus of Mystery

12:46 / 15.01.05

If anyone says 'huggles' it's pistols at dawn.

13:41 / 15.01.05

And I would like to accept your apology and offer mine.

15:47 / 15.01.05

And I'd like to apologise for saying that I like Batman: The Cult several times.

miss wonderstarr

15:51 / 15.01.05

That will never be forgiven, Benny.

02:09 / 16.01.05

And they all lived happily ever after. Except Benny.

This is going to be the biggest-selling comic in around a decade, I'd wot.

16:25 / 30.01.05

On a lark, I bought the new WIZARD cause I had a feeling it would actually have some news in it this time around and some geniunely interesting stuff, unlike normal. And I was right.

There are lots of Jim Lee Batman & Robin sketches as Lee tries to work out Batman's look for the series (the promo art earlier in this thread is not final concept designs).
The rumors of the little fins on Batman's gloves being used as offensive weapons in the upcoming BATMAN BEGINS (they're apparently sharp like knives, thereby giving them a reason to exist for the first time, other than looking cool) seem to be backed up by Lee's sharp looking fins on the All-Star Batman's gauntlets.

And the Alex Ross input Lee mentions that since young Dick Grayson chose the name Robin because one of his childhood heroes was Robin Hood (an actual fact from Robin's first appearances, he didn't choose it cause of the bird), maybe the All-Star Robin should have a green hood that he would wear over his head every once in a while; otherwise it's just down by his cape. It actually looks pretty cool. This idea will probably make it into the final version.

01:48 / 07.02.05

I think the problem of a lot of people with Frank Miller is this:
He´s not an "idea man" a la Grant Morrison.
He´s not a "poet" a la Alan Moore.
He´s the master storyteller. His strenght is the pace of the story, the rythm. I think that this is related with him being an artist , too. He doesn´t write for other pencillers usually
( he did it for Sienki, Darrow, Gibbons, John JR... best of the best) cause i think he "writes" with his art, with his panels. His prose is very "hardboiled", sometimes over the top, but it fits with his art even when this stories can be read without any prose at all ( or almost).

And yes, almost every single story of Frank is about a man doing what he has to do, but he´s the best at this.

Frank is my favourite writer, not for his prose or for his ideas but for how he can make me feel the rythm of the story. He grabs you by the neck and doesnt let you go til the end. But that´s my opinion.

P.D: Everybody says that Miller is grim and gritty...i don´t think so...he´s a true romantic in the sense that everything has to be like it has to be, and he has a brilliant sense of humor

Sorry for my horrrrible english, don´t be too hard on me

Page: 1 2(3)4 5 6 7 8... 11