Batman #681 - RIP conclusion (spoilers)

[pauwoo]

If youve read Morrison's "Animal Man" run, Morrison himself admits (In the story Animal Man leaves the DC universe and comes into our... "universe", and has a chat with Morrison himself) that all of his stories seem to be leading up to something great but then they end weakly. However for some reason that doesn't bug me all that much. For instance The Invisibles was one of my favorite comics of all time, despite that the fact that I basically have no idea what so ever what the hell happened at the end. In my mind Morrison's stuff is about the ride, not the destination. I loved R.I.P. despite (yet again) i dont really have any idea what hell happened at the end. Im sure the answer is somewhere in this thread but i just dont have the energy to comb through 33 pages of posts. I guess ill just wait for the next Bats issues, which will hopefully spell it out a little more for the slow witted such as myself. Unless someone who's awesome out there wants to private message me with an explanation for it all such as Dick holding Bats cowl, or the bat signal on the "six months late" page.

I've read his run on animal-man and it is one the few things he has done I actually like, earth-2 & his mini flash run being the others.

If his stories are more about the ride than the destination, then isn't that a waste of a journey. My main complaint about Morrison is he starts of really well, then it all goes to hell, it's almost like he changes the story half-way through because he has thought of something "better".

[ifeelasleep]

When i read that issue where bruce says "i got over it" to jezebel it always bothered me that bruce's expression changed all of a sudden, i thought it was bad storytelling, but seeing those little hints now is great.

also,

Hurt to Bruce:
"i curse the cape and cowl, next time you wear it will be the last" (final crisis)

someone dies in final crisis, and all the last rites are being prepared... batman?

grant morrison : Bruce will come back in 2010 . will he come back from the dead after the blackest night?

i hope not.

[The Shadow]

I agree completely.

Same here.

[Mat001]

But Final Crisis has not been solicited with crossing over into Final Crisis at least in the book itself.

No, but "Final Crisis" #6 has been solicited as the final fate of the Dark Knight. Morrison has also told us that the two stories intersect over the next two issues of Batman.


am I the first to say that the idea of Batman fighting the "Devil" is just stupid?

Even the idea that Batman is just so "good" that he warrants the attention of Satan seems silly.

No more sillier than the world Batman occupies. Batman has gone against angels and God's spirit of vengeance known as the Spectre. He worked with an angel for a time in the JLA. He took part in a war of the gods. He was tempted by Neron in "Underworld Unleashed". How is this any sillier than those stories?


also,

Hurt to Bruce:
"i curse the cape and cowl, next time you wear it will be the last" (final crisis)

someone dies in final crisis, and all the last rites are being prepared... batman?

grant morrison : Bruce will come back in 2010 . will he come back from the dead after the blackest night?

i hope not.

No, I'm thinking that what happens is that whatever happens in Command D will be too much for Bruce and that's why he walks away. For all we know, he might go insane or is completely broken mentally.

[Sidepocket]

No more sillier than the world Batman occupies. Batman has gone against angels and God's spirit of vengeance known as the Spectre. He worked with an angel for a time in the JLA. He took part in a war of the gods. He was tempted by Neron in "Underworld Unleashed". How is this any sillier than those stories?


Simple. People hate those stories. That is why it was smart that Nolan is currently keeping his universe separate from the rest of DC. It just does not fit with the type of character he is.

[Bruce Wayne Jr.]

I read this on another board and it pretty much sums up my feelings about RIP


Huh. Until I hit the intrawebs last night, I had no idea that RIP was being followed so closely by so many. I guess I should have known; a “Batman dies” story is always going to draw a crowd. As for the reactions themselves, well… I can’t say I’m surprised by them. I’d been selling this run short myself, all two-plus years of it, right up til my second read of the finale. Then all the pieces fell into place and I felt like an idiot for not seeing what was going on long before now. Some argue that having to read something twice means the writing is poor. I’d argue, instead, that if I’d paid proper attention the first time through (which I didn’t), I’d have picked up on it. If I have any criticism on that front, it might be that the story took so long to unfold in real time that too many important details slipped my mind. This isn’t a criticism of the book’s lateness, mind you. It’s just a danger of reading and writing stories that are serialized over the course of many months.

I've also noticed that a great deal of criticism tends to focus more on the broken promises that Morrison and Didio made as publicity. Expectations have clouded an objective view of the story.

[Jake V]

Simple. People hate those stories. That is why it was smart that Nolan is currently keeping his universe separate from the rest of DC. It just does not fit with the type of character he is.
besides you, what people hate the first 40 issues of JLA?

[Superbeast]

"Sarcastic" was probably too loaded a word, I admit.

It's just that all these issues were raised, and instead of resolving them directly, we're told that Batman is right, everyone else is wrong, and that's all there is to it. So the issues are left gnawing in the back of the mind. It's as if all the narrative cues got together and sat him down and told him, "Batman, we're worried about you. We think this compulsive prep-time is bad for your health." And Batman responds with, "NO NO, I CAN HANDLE IT, IN FACT I'VE PREPARED FOR JUST SUCH AN OCCASION," and triggers his back-up plan and beats them all up.

I absolutely agree that Batman is victorious. That he can force a senseless universe to make sense. But my god, look at the personal cost. Habitually switching cups with his drinking buddies. Memorizing the finite thousands of ways he can die and preparing countermeasures. Deciding that when he finds himself falling in love with a woman, that it's a pretty good sign that she's evil, and that he should launch a secret investigation into her past and fake a loveless relationship to manipulate her. Even for a comic book world, this is a pretty terrible way to have to live.

I was just hoping for a resolution where he can go out and fight evil and be victorious, without having to sacrifice 100% of his mental state to accomplish it.

In it's own twisted way, as much as I hate to say it, this story is just a well drawn 60s Batman episode. The Batman of Zur En Arrh and Bruce's "I was playing you when you were playing me, that's why I'm the Batman!" shtick might as well have been Bruce pulling out "Bat Devil Repellant" and shaking his head "so the effects wear off from the drugs" before saving the day. And of course as the world's greatest detective, his death rips off Holmes and Moriarty tumbling to their doom over a waterfall, except this is Batman so instead it's an exploding helicopter crashing into a river. And of course, all of this is intentional because MORRISON IS SO F'N GREAT, EVEN IF IT MAKES NO SENSE GODDAMN IT, THIS SQUARE PEG IS GOING INTO THE ROUND HOLE I'VE MADE!

Also, apparently The Devil, allegedly an omniscient being who orchestrated the tragedies that led to the Batman being created and staying active for this long he personified a pure and driven soul who's corruption would signify a victory for evil so significant it warrants the Devil's actual involvement, wasn't paying any attention to the moments when Bruce was concocting his counterplan.

So all in all, Batman > The Devil via more time to plan things out. Batman planned for just such an occasion in case a secret organisation ran by Satan tried to break his spirit. He also threw the Tooth Fairy in Bellereve and broke his arm and keeps Rudolph's red nose as a souvenir from the time he left a beartrap in his fireplace and electrified the roof of Wayne Manor. The Batman plans for all possibilities, even the supernatural and likely fictional creations of myth, religion and folklore.

[gregoreite]

I loved the ending to Batman RIP! It's interesting, because in my opinion, it's great in a way that I'm not used to a comic book being great; the more I think about the issue and the entire arc, the more I'm enjoying it. The story doesn't just go away after you've read it, you're left to think about things, even though they've been revealed. I mean, we saw who the Black Glove is, yet we're still asking, who are they? We saw who Dr. Hurt is, and yet we're still asking, who is he? We saw what happened to Batman at the end, yet we're still asking, what happened to Batman, lol. I can understand how that can frustrate some fans, but I think that's an amazing feat accomplished by the Batman team, showing us the answers directly in plain sight, yet leaving the mystery to remain. It's like the answer is there, but it isn't there at the same time, much like Dr. Hurt, who is the "missing piece," yet has been "there from the beginning."

An earlier poster mentioned the idea that perhaps Batman's quest to observe, analyze, plan for, and prepare for evil is ultimately futile, because it only leaves you the options of joining it or being cursed by it, which are the options Dr. Hurt gives Batman at the conclusion. I'm sorry that I don't remember who you are that said this, but I think that comment is genius; probably one of the smartest comments about Batman RIP I've heard! I think it even carries over to us, pouring through the comic, trying to put everything together to make sense out of it, criticizing what we perceive to be weaknesses in the story, only for us to realize that the answers are both there and not there at the same time. It leaves you to keep thinking about the comic over and over, long after you've read it, which is more than I can say about many comics in this era, that are just 5-minute reads, and then you forget about them forever.

Finally, I enjoyed Dini's "Heart of Hush" like a lot of people. I don't understand though, how people could compare the Detective arc to "Batman RIP" and use "Heart of Hush" as a proof for their criticism of the Batman creative team. "Heart of Hush" was a great story, but if you'll notice, people are STILL talking about "Batman RIP." When "Heart of Hush" ended, it ended, I put it down, and honestly, I probably won't look it over again. When "Batman RIP" ended, it ended, and yet we're still talking about it, looking at past issues, thought about future issues, and I'm sure it's going to be talked about and thought about for a while. For those who didn't like the issue, you have to respect at least that. Each issue of "Batman RIP," even this entire run, are issues that I've read over multiple times, pondered for hours, and made me excited for future stories. Not many comic books can get readers to do that, and I applaud the entire Batman team for accomplishing this feat.

[Red_Knight]

Also, apparently The Devil, allegedly an omniscient being who orchestrated the tragedies that led to the Batman being created [...] wasn't paying any attention to the moments when Bruce was concocting his counterplan.

Actually, the Biblical devil is never depicted as being omniscient in any way, shape or form. He's a great showman, but that's pretty much it. In fact, omniscience is one of the three defining qualities attributed to God, along with omnipresence and eternity. The devil possesses none of those three.

As a fallen angel, he obviously wields supernatural powers, but he can not personally be in more than one place at a time, nor is he ever depicted as being able to look into the hearts and minds of men. What he does to tempt people is pretty much based on observation, guess work, and throwing sh*t at the wall hoping it'll stick. So, Dr. Hurt's methods in Batman actually seem pretty accurate. (If you think about it, this only makes sense. If the devil was omniscient, he would know who could be tempted successfully and wouldn't bother with the rest of mankind.)

So, from a Christian point of view, Batman and the Joker being able to outsmart the devil would be theologically sound.

[greenmanfalling]

Not looking to promote any additional heated argument, but I'm curious: Does anyone else besides me actually like getting f*cked with at the end of the epic storyline? All are privy to their own opinions of course, but it strikes me as particularly gut-busting when an arc I've spent almost a year anticipating and musing comes to a minor fizzle with a ridiculous cliffhanger helicopter explosion totally reminiscent of the Joker's exit at the end of "Death in the Family." I don't know. Hell, I'll take this sh*t any day over Jason's resurrection.

Also, this has been discussed a bit previously, but does anyone else think "evil" and "good" aren't really terms applicable to the representations in this comic? 680 had quite a bit of rhetoric concerning Batman's assertion that "somehow this all makes sense." I think it's been talked about considerably before that order and foresight could be what consume Bruce rather than a shallow sense of becoming tainted with evil he confronts. The "Batman thinks of everything" mantra feels like a weakness in itself when dealing with his own history. It seems kind of ridiculous to me to take away the chance encounter flavor of Thomas and Martha's death, given that if it were anything other than chance Batman's war would not be societal in orientation but rather directed at a particular organization or person (i.e. wacky rich gamblers).

If he truly does think of everything, he's a "zorro in arkham" who by creating order out of crazy would disrupt his own history. His parents then weren't killed under shadow of caprice but rather in response to an elaborate, silly plot. To me this makes the Hurt's bi-directional identity reveal a bit more sensical, as he is either Thomas Wayne (a conclusion of order) or something as nondescript and universal as the devil (in which case why fight an all-powerful element of chaos, hang up the cowl and retire). The slow-vision he uses to see the "grids" and the "machine designed to create the batman" (or whatever he says) fits in with this sense of ordering. I guess all of this may have been discussed at length in reference to Batman's desire to order or understand the Joker.

But the whole storyline to me suggests that there is only mediocrity in the opponent components of the Black glove organization. The ridiculous roman gimmicks (mocked by Batman himself) stemming from a bright and silly era (yes I know a large current component of Batman is gimmick, but the club of villains comes across to me as significantly more pronounced). There's never anything there that's really worthy of the Batman. It's all predictable, anticipatable...

This once again leads to the idea of Batman being the real Black Glove, suggested by everyone on or off the forum at first, including Jezebel Jet, (who herself wouldn't have believed it when she said it). The imagery of his isolated black fist crashing through the helicopter window and all that ... Even Dr. Hurt in the end was entirely conventional in his choice of death trap (buried alive--c'mon), which then, along with the aerial beatdown issued, once again suggest that the Batman even succeeds in ordering chaos. But it's a mental catch-22, since then maybe Hurt isn't devil-chaos but is actually Thomas Wayne (stupid!). So maybe the black glove isn't AN organization but the act OF organization, detection, etc, in which case the black glove actually wins at the end via Bruce's anticipation, prescience, whatever, even though the people calling themselves members of the black glove lose. Personally, I don't really care what Hurt's factual identity is beyond the goofy metaphor (As far as I'm concerned he's a psychologist with a notion), I had fun with it.

If I have added nothing to the discussion, I apologize, looking now at the posts above I see some of the same lines of thought, but I can't bring myself to read through 35 pages of posts, especially if some of them are as long as the piece of sh*t I just spewed. I just get a kick out of deliberately placed comic cliches (like All Star Batman and Robin's silly, shifting time-stream: you know, the 5 minutes later, 7 minutes ago, simultaneous milk-carton/kidnapping stuff), even if they're not terribly deep.

-Sorry for the length minus depth of this post.

[Paul McEnery]

I think the writer will break the wall again like he did on Animal Man and we'll find that it's really Grant Morrison who's behind everything.

Nah. Batman himself IS behind everything (even as there are forces beyond his control which formed him). He decides to take on timeless evil, and what this does is generate a form for the timeless evil to take.

Hurt isn't THE Devil, he's the personification of Batman's evil. Grant's Jesus (Invisibles 18,is it?) is the stone who breaks hearts. Hurt is the piece that doesn't fit.

There's a part of 12-step lore that's about confronting the void. Addicts are always trying to fill the void -- and the void's a very hungry bugger and will eat however much you put into it and ask for more.

What I figured out is that addicts treat the void as a bug when it's a feature. If you're sat in a room, you don't pile all your furniture in the void in the room -- that's a doorway!

Batman's problem is that he's trying to create a rational order around something that isn't rational. He thinks the solution to the problem is containing the void, locking it in a box -- hence the Joker's complaint -- but by doing so he's containing himself in a box (how do you get the goose out of the bottle without breaking it or killing the goose?). What grows around that piece of grit, that piece that doesn't fit, the piece of pain that has to be quarantined and smothered, is the black pearl that is Batman's life.

Whether Hurt is the Devil or just some crazy bored millionaire built around his own foundation of pain is besides the point. Batman's life has transformed him into a tulpa, a thought form that externalizes that piece of grit so that Batman can confront it, fight it, box it, destroy it...

...anything but accept that void for what it is, the opening that allows life to carry on, the doorway you step through into participation in life rather than being the outsider who always has to control it.

[Paul McEnery]

-Sorry for the length minus depth of this post.

Deep enough for me, and solid.

[IamtheRock3]

I did like how it was hinted

Hurt is the reason gotham so easily escapable, and that he help raise the crime in Gotham.

I mean think of how gotham would be if Batman didnt have to RECATCH the criminals over and over and over again.

[dotdotdot]

Nah. Batman himself IS behind everything (even as there are forces beyond his control which formed him). He decides to take on timeless evil, and what this does is generate a form for the timeless evil to take.

Hurt isn't THE Devil, he's the personification of Batman's evil. Grant's Jesus (Invisibles 18,is it?) is the stone who breaks hearts. Hurt is the piece that doesn't fit.

There's a part of 12-step lore that's about confronting the void. Addicts are always trying to fill the void -- and the void's a very hungry bugger and will eat however much you put into it and ask for more.

What I figured out is that addicts treat the void as a bug when it's a feature. If you're sat in a room, you don't pile all your furniture in the void in the room -- that's a doorway!

Batman's problem is that he's trying to create a rational order around something that isn't rational. He thinks the solution to the problem is containing the void, locking it in a box -- hence the Joker's complaint -- but by doing so he's containing himself in a box (how do you get the goose out of the bottle without breaking it or killing the goose?). What grows around that piece of grit, that piece that doesn't fit, the piece of pain that has to be quarantined and smothered, is the black pearl that is Batman's life.

Whether Hurt is the Devil or just some crazy bored millionaire built around his own foundation of pain is besides the point. Batman's life has transformed him into a tulpa, a thought form that externalizes that piece of grit so that Batman can confront it, fight it, box it, destroy it...

...anything but accept that void for what it is, the opening that allows life to carry on, the doorway you step through into participation in life rather than being the outsider who always has to control it.

otm
.....

[Dr. Chaos]

You know, as disappointed as I have been in Grant Morrison's drug induced Batman run, I will say I do like this Dr. Hurt fellow.

No one is going to take the "Devil" possibility seriously (and they really shouldn't) if he's ever used again but I look forward to seeing Mangrove or whoever the hell he's really supposed to be again someday.

Lets just say Dr. Hurt was evil incarnate though, that entire scene where The Joker essentially told him that he was better than him and eloquently told him to **** off right after telling him exactly what was going to happen before driving off was awesome on a scale I don't think the human mind can comprehend.

[ThreeDays]

I've also noticed that a great deal of criticism tends to focus more on the broken promises that Morrison and Didio made as publicity. Expectations have clouded an objective view of the story.

I wouldn't say they've clouded an objective view of it, but they have definitely clouded an isolated view of it. Since the story doesn't exist in isolation, though, and those who read the external noise can't wipe it from their memory, I don't think it's fair to hold readers responsible for it affecting their expectations, and, thus, their impression of the ending.

While hyping a story is just part of the way the comic industry is run, the specific wording and promises are all deliberate and calculated. Just as Joe Quesada shouldn't have promised that Spider-Man's unmasking wouldn't be wiped away ("We won't be pulling a Bobby Ewing with this," he said) and that the Marvel editors were "excited about where it takes us and the story possibilities it offers," it wasn't necessary for Morrison to say that the identity of the villain in "Batman R.I.P." would be "the most shocking revelation in 70 years" (emphasis mine).

"Revelation" implies that the identity would be explicitly declared. While it's pretty clear that it's the Devil, and regardless of whether that's a satisfying answer, there wasn't an outright statement to the effect "Dr. Hurt was the Devil." For that matter, people are even praising the notion that "you can think it was the Devil if you want, or Mangrove Pierce if you want, or Joe Chill if you want, Thomas Wayne if you want, or Wacky Psychiatrist Dude if you want." There wasn't an explicit answer that couldn't be easily dismissed two issues from now with "Everyone just felt like using Devilish imagery in their wording that week."

While it was a well-crafted story, people are justified in their disappointment with what they were led to believe they would be reading: An unambiguous declaration of identity. For many, their assessment of the story as good or bad was wrapped up in that revelation, and they were encouraged to do that by the promotional campaign surrounding this story.

Likewise, the #681 solicit promising "the horrifying and shocking truth" behind the Black Glove could only lead to disappointment. Many people are taking this "truth" to be quite a different number of things, meaning it wasn't explicitly revealed.

For that matter, if this truth is the most common interpretation — that the Black Glove masterminded the creation of Batman, and his parents' deaths wasn't a random act of crime — that doesn't logically lead to Batman retiring.

It's a well done story with carefully crafted clues. I like it, and it certainly goes great lengths toward showing what a badass Batman is, while also demonstrating how insane and twisted he actually is. I'll certainly buy the hardcover collected edition, but I honestly don't feel like it covers much in the way of new ground.

I was distrusftul of the solicitations and sensationalist interviews from the start, so I wasn't that disappointed by the ending. I actually like it, in all honesty, and don't have a problem with Hurt being the Devil.

While Batman stories are usually better when presented in a setting more similar to the real world and less connected to the rest of the DC universe, I enjoyed "Batman: Gothic," so it's not like this is the first time I've seen the Devil appear in a Batman story. For that matter, I loved "A Death in the Family," where Superman plays a vital role, and the Animated DCU.

For me, in an attempt to assess this story in isolation, I can say it was above average for comics, but not really the most spectacular thing Morrison's done. I found his runs on "Animal Man" and "X-Men" better, though I'm a bigger fan of Batman.

Assessing it in the context of the solicitations and interviews, it was overhyped and doomed to disappoint many. For obvious reasons, the solicit for #681 couldn't promise "ambiguous answers to the questions you've vigorously debated online for months!"

Again, I agree with the poster I quoted that the story is being received so poorly by many due to factors outside the story itself, but they can hardly be blamed for being disappointed given that they took the solicitations and interviews at their word. We don't want the promises like "rich flavor" or "hearty and filling" on our food to be metaphorical or empty sensationalism, and it's fair enough that people wouldn't expect it in writing either.

[mgs]

may read later, but without reading all these comments, I have no idea what this whole saga was all about and how it ended. :confused:

[smoothjokes]

I'm looking forward to getting the Black Glove HC and RIP Deluxe HC. I'm starting to switch to trade-waiting with all the price hikes lately. I'm sure it'll read as a whole a lot better too.

[Harding Prime]

...I don't know, I think this sounded a lot better in Morrison's head then it came out on the page.

I will wait to see what happens in "...Rites" and FC.

I enjoyed the story and the symmetry of red and black, good and evil, and the first page of the arc being the last pages ending.

I think Batman has something to do with the Black Glove. He thinks of everything, even how to make his best foe, and he has been talking about how boring Gotham has been. I think he made a deal with Hurt when locked in the chamber to create an unstoppable foe, with funding coming from him. Because his money really is UP here.

Though the last issue, if nothing else, definitely left you wanting more, the best part of the story was how insignificant Joker's apparent death was. It was an accident by Damien, not even knowing what he has done, that was classic.



I wouldn't say they've clouded an objective view of it, but they have definitely clouded an isolated view of it.

I would....

They built it to the realms of, you ready for the biggest Batman reveal of all-time!!!

....apparently not.

[bannermanonemillion]

Forgive my ignorance, but has anyone mentioned the fact that on the last page, we see Martha Wayne wearing black gloves?

[Kiryu]

Forgive my ignorance, but has anyone mentioned the fact that on the last page, we see Martha Wayne wearing black gloves?

It was brought up, both of Bruce's parents wore them. Gordon was also wearing Black Gloves when he went to Wayne Manor. Still not sure what its exactly implying though. Was she a member of the Glove? Were the documents actually true?

[Harding Prime]

It was brought up, both of Bruce's parents wore them. Gordon was also wearing Black Gloves when he went to Wayne Manor. Still not sure what its exactly implying though. Was she a member of the Glove? Were the documents actually true?

I'm wearing black gloves.... Dunt DUnt DUNT!

[Lupek]

There are a lot of smart, insightful posts about this story in this thread, so I am a little intimidated to give my dumb ass comic book guy review but here goes.

I thought this was the best Batman story i've read (in the in-continuity ongoings) in the past 3+ years I have been back reading comics. I don't know who Dr Hurt is (I don't believe it's really Thomas Wayne) but it doesn't affect my enjoyment of the story. The conclusion to RIP is like one of those endings in tv and film (like the Prisoner or Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?) that has you asking questions at the end. This will be one of the few story arcs in recent comics that I look forward to rereading to pick up on all the stuff many posters here picked up on. And I am not a Morrison apologist. I've only read All Star Superman, 7 Soldiers Frankenstein and his Adam Strange one shot. Batman RIP was just a fun ride and I am sorry that Morrison is done with this book.

Anyway, I enjoyed it. And I enjoyed Morrison's run more than most everything Dini's done with Detective (although the finish to the Hush story was good and I liked the Facade and Globe stories).

[James Conniff]

They built it to the realms of, you ready for the biggest Batman reveal of all-time!!!

....apparently not.

Ijust can't believe that this is supposed to be the last tale of Bruce Wayne as Batman...I finished the story and just thought...This is it?

Grant may have an answer for who Dr. Hurt is....but I'm past any real point in caring now. I don't feel the desire to continue picking up Batman beyond "Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader" at this point.

And why should I? I get some big mystery in Batman that changes the character forever (at least until Final Crisis) and there's no resolution to the story at all. Instead we get an ambiguous non reveal of Hurt's identity and a Fiery Helicopter crash to "kill" Bruce....

At this point I really would like to know, with promises of such huge stories keeping my interest up, and getting revelations that are weak...why should I keep buying this....As of now I'm really thinking of dropping both Batman and Detective (and the fact that this screws up Dini's awesome detective comics really pisses me off).

[Lew Moxon]

Forgive my ignorance, but has anyone mentioned the fact that on the last page, we see Martha Wayne wearing black gloves?



That's my idea

[Captain Jim]

I am sorry that Morrison is done with this book.



But he isn't. He wrote the next two issues and will be back again after a break of just a few months. He says he wants to stay on the book indefinitely.

[Captain Jim]

I haven’t had the time to post my own feelings about the RIP conclusion since I actually read it several days ago. So here goes.

Basically, I wasn’t too impressed. After this story had been drawn out over five issues, I thought the conclusion seemed rushed. Batman is buried alive off camera? Nightwing bursts loose in a matter of seconds? The Club of Heroes shows up (why? They didn’t really do anything). And everything is wrapped up very quickly. To think that a helicopter crash would take out Batman, after everything else he’d been through, is silly. Nightwing holding his cowl and cape means nothing; he wasn’t wearing them.

The explanation of Dr. Hurt’s identity was unsatisfying because nothing was clearly revealed. I can’t help but believe that this was intentional on Morrison’s part. Whether he intends to be more forthcoming in the future, or whether he intends to leave it ambiguous is unknown at this point.

Everyone seems to agree that there are three possibilities:

1) Dr. Hurt is actually the devil. This seems to be the most favored position (at least on this forum). It should be noted that this is claimed by no one anywhere in the story. True, there seem to be numerous veiled references to Satan in this story, but I still think this conclusion is a leap in logic. No doubt my feelings are influenced by the fact that I find this conclusion incredibly distasteful. A big part of my longstanding affection for Batman is the fact that he operates in a more realistic world than other “superheroes”. (Hence my longstanding belief that Batman doesn’t belong in the JLA.) To have the villain revealed as the devil (if this is true) is incredibly hackneyed and disappointing. If anyone but fan-god Morrison had written this, I suspect it would have been universally panned. Besides, I can’t imagine why Batman would warrant such attention by the devil.

2) Dr. Hurt is actually Thomas Wayne. This is what he actually claims, mind you. Though some find this possibility distasteful, I have found it intriguing from the beginning. It violates nothing in Batman continuity and opens a fascinating possibility. It also meets the criteria of a character who has been part of the Batman mythos since the beginning. (IMO, to say that Satan was there from the beginning, unseen, is ludicrous.) It also meets the criteria of changing the character forever (How would Bruce cope with the revelation that his entire career as Batman is based on a lie?). I don’t find it unbelievable at all. It’s only natural that Bruce’s memories as a young boy would be idealistic. It’s only natural that he might not know about his parents’ “dirty secrets.” It’s only natural that Alfred would keep quiet if Bruce was really his son through an illegitimate relationship with Martha. On the other hand, if it’s not really true, I find the whole introduction of the topic to be a pointless cop-out.

3) Dr. Hurt is actually Mangrove Pierce. This is what Bruce evidently believes. If this is true, I cry “foul.” As near as I can see from once again skimming the entire arc, Pierce is rarely mentioned and (as far as I can see) never seen. If this is indeed the answer, I say that Morrison didn’t play fair.

I didn’t entirely hate this issue. Several have said that the comments from the Joker were a nice touch, and I agree. And I don’t think it’s fair all the hits Tony Daniel has taken about the art. He may not be the best artist to ever depict Batman, but personally, I find his work to be quite satisfactory. And, of course, the Alex Ross covers are very nice.

I’ll be looking forward to reading #682 this week to see if it actually clarifies anything, or simply goes off in a different direction entirely.

[Red_Knight]

But he isn't. He wrote the next two issues and will be back again after a break of just a few months. He says he wants to stay on the book indefinitely.

*throws up hands* Hooray!

[Lupek]

But he isn't. He wrote the next two issues and will be back again after a break of just a few months. He says he wants to stay on the book indefinitely.

I didn't know that. For some reason I thought he was upset about Final Crisis and leaving superhero books. Thanks for the heads up.

[Lew Moxon]

I haven’t had the time to post my own feelings about the RIP conclusion since I actually read it several days ago. So here goes.

Basically, I wasn’t too impressed. After this story had been drawn out over five issues, I thought the conclusion seemed rushed. Batman is buried alive off camera? Nightwing bursts loose in a matter of seconds? The Club of Heroes shows up (why? They didn’t really do anything). And everything is wrapped up very quickly. To think that a helicopter crash would take out Batman, after everything else he’d been through, is silly. Nightwing holding his cowl and cape means nothing; he wasn’t wearing them.

The explanation of Dr. Hurt’s identity was unsatisfying because nothing was clearly revealed. I can’t help but believe that this was intentional on Morrison’s part. Whether he intends to be more forthcoming in the future, or whether he intends to leave it ambiguous is unknown at this point.

Everyone seems to agree that there are three possibilities:

1) Dr. Hurt is actually the devil. This seems to be the most favored position (at least on this forum). It should be noted that this is claimed by no one anywhere in the story. True, there seem to be numerous veiled references to Satan in this story, but I still think this conclusion is a leap in logic. No doubt my feelings are influenced by the fact that I find this conclusion incredibly distasteful. A big part of my longstanding affection for Batman is the fact that he operates in a more realistic world than other “superheroes”. (Hence my longstanding belief that Batman doesn’t belong in the JLA.) To have the villain revealed as the devil (if this is true) is incredibly hackneyed and disappointing. If anyone but fan-god Morrison had written this, I suspect it would have been universally panned. Besides, I can’t imagine why Batman would warrant such attention by the devil.

2) Dr. Hurt is actually Thomas Wayne. This is what he actually claims, mind you. Though some find this possibility distasteful, I have found it intriguing from the beginning. It violates nothing in Batman continuity and opens a fascinating possibility. It also meets the criteria of a character who has been part of the Batman mythos since the beginning. (IMO, to say that Satan was there from the beginning, unseen, is ludicrous.) It also meets the criteria of changing the character forever (How would Bruce cope with the revelation that his entire career as Batman is based on a lie?). I don’t find it unbelievable at all. It’s only natural that Bruce’s memories as a young boy would be idealistic. It’s only natural that he might not know about his parents’ “dirty secrets.” It’s only natural that Alfred would keep quiet if Bruce was really his son through an illegitimate relationship with Martha. On the other hand, if it’s not really true, I find the whole introduction of the topic to be a pointless cop-out.

3) Dr. Hurt is actually Mangrove Pierce. This is what Bruce evidently believes. If this is true, I cry “foul.” As near as I can see from once again skimming the entire arc, Pierce is rarely mentioned and (as far as I can see) never seen. If this is indeed the answer, I say that Morrison didn’t play fair.

I didn’t entirely hate this issue. Several have said that the comments from the Joker were a nice touch, and I agree. And I don’t think it’s fair all the hits Tony Daniel has taken about the art. He may not be the best artist to ever depict Batman, but personally, I find his work to be quite satisfactory. And, of course, the Alex Ross covers are very nice.

I’ll be looking forward to reading #682 this week to see if it actually clarifies anything, or simply goes off in a different direction entirely.


I think Mr. Morrison wants it to be Satan, which I dislike for more or less the reasons you list.
He seems to be more a servant of evil than master visavi "The Black Glove"

Thomas Wayne: I have a few problems with it, namely why now? This is a man who could, at any moment, broken Batman with a phone call.

And if Dr. Wayne was Dr. Hurt when the experiments occured, wouldn't Bruce Wayne know his own father when he saw him
His death fakery plan doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since Thomas Wayne was always portrayed as being shot first. Wouldn't it make more sense for
Martha to be shot first with the real bullet, with the blank at Tommy coming latter.

Thomas Wayne should be far older than Hurt gives the impression of being. (Excluding the satan thing, I'm talking appearances.)

Thomas Wayne is older or at youngest the same age as Alfred.

Dr. Simon Hurt looks, like he's maybe five years older than Bruce, tops.

Mangrove Pierce: This could make sense, if explicated the right way.

So basically, its The Devil or a really nutty Mangrove Pierce.

[Killing_Joke88]

I think Mr. Morrison wants it to be Satan, which I dislike for more or less the reasons you list.
He seems to be more a servant of evil than master visavi "The Black Glove"

Thomas Wayne: I have a few problems with it, namely why now? This is a man who could, at any moment, broken Batman with a phone call.

And if Dr. Wayne was Dr. Hurt when the experiments occured, wouldn't Bruce Wayne know his own father when he saw him
His death fakery plan doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since Thomas Wayne was always portrayed as being shot first. Wouldn't it make more sense for
Martha to be shot first with the real bullet, with the blank at Tommy coming latter.

Thomas Wayne should be far older than Hurt gives the impression of being. (Excluding the satan thing, I'm talking appearances.)

Thomas Wayne is older or at youngest the same age as Alfred.

Dr. Simon Hurt looks, like he's maybe five years older than Bruce, tops.

Mangrove Pierce: This could make sense, if explicated the right way.

So basically, its The Devil or a really nutty Mangrove Pierce.

I believe Hurt is Mangrove Pierce. All the allusions to him being "the enemy" come straight from his mouth. He has become a megalomaniac who is obsessed with destroying Batman's world. By claiming he is Satan he makes Batman believe he has found the ultimate evil. By claiming he is Thomas Wayne he makes Bruce believe his who life has been a lie. By throwing both options out there he is trying to destroy Bruce and Batman's psyche all at once. If he succeeds he destroys the man and the symbol. Thats just my opinion of course.

Also, I don't know if anyone is under the impression that Bruce Wayne died, but he didn't. He is still alive because he wrote the final entry in the Black Case book.

[lawman]

There was hardly any way for this story to avoid being profoundly unsatisfying (http://blog.smartmemes.com/2008/12/batman-really-infuriatingly-pointless/).

The villain is the Devil? Profoundly unsatisfying. It's not in keeping with the grounded nature of the character in general, or this story in particular. Besides which, the Devil has no reason to single out Batman as an opponent, and if he did he could devise a far more effective and less convoluted scheme than the one portrayed here.

The villain is Thomas Wayne? Profoundly unsatisfying. Thematically, it undermines the very foundation of the Batman—****ing with one of the best origins in comics is not a good idea. And in terms of story logic, it just doesn't make sense. Where has he been for the last several decades? And why would he harbor a grduge against his son?

The villain is Mangrove Pierce? Profoundly unsatisfying. He's not a character, he's a plot device.

The villain is Dr. Hurt? Still pretty damn unsatisfying (and unmotivated), but this is the version I'm inclined to go with... FWIW. He has at least some history with the Batman, and saying he's just a shrink who went 'round the bend makes more sense than any of the other alternatives.

[Paul McEnery]

There was hardly any way for this story to avoid being profoundly unsatisfying (http://blog.smartmemes.com/2008/12/batman-really-infuriatingly-pointless/).

The villain is the Devil? Profoundly unsatisfying. It's not in keeping with the grounded nature of the character in general, or this story in particular. Besides which, the Devil has no reason to single out Batman as an opponent, and if he did he could devise a far more effective and less convoluted scheme than the one portrayed here.

The villain is Thomas Wayne? Profoundly unsatisfying. Thematically, it undermines the very foundation of the Batman—fucking with one of the best origins in comics is not a good idea. And in terms of story logic, it just doesn't make sense. Where has he been for the last several decades? And why would he harbor a grduge against his son?

The villain is Mangrove Pierce? Profoundly unsatisfying. He's not a character, he's a plot device.

The villain is Dr. Hurt? Still pretty damn unsatisfying (and unmotivated), but this is the version I'm inclined to go with... FWIW. He has at least some history with the Batman, and saying he's just a shrink who went 'round the bend makes more sense than any of the other alternatives.

Did you even bother to read everyone else's understanding of this?

[Paul McEnery]

So basically, its The Devil or a really nutty Mangrove Pierce.

Correct.

Although there's no reason it can't be both.

Whatever it is we mean by "The Devil".

After all, "Joe Chill in Hell" is Joe Chill in Gotham, tormented by the Batman.

[lepeos]

If it is maybe Thomas Wayne, was it ever explained why he's such a dick to his own son? I mean they had the whole sordid affair, Martha with a train track of needle marks, drugged out of her mind ect, okay

But how does that make him an insane(ly patient) criminal mastermind


Also, was it ever addressed that it was Bruce that killed that Honor Jackson guy, he gave him the couple hundred that he blew on drugs that killed him in the first issue, was that part of the back-up personality? And whats with the Monk/ Red eye-guy being all super mystical, and then "Yeah I know what you mean, backup your mind Windows XP style!" *note not exact paraphrase*

This all feels very Lost-ish, and I don't just mean the whole answering 1 question whilst leaving a million more for next time. I agree that the devil is stretching it, I mean, and I don't get how both Hurt and Batman both picked Zur-En-Arrh as their respective trigger phrases. Jinx?

And whats the deal with Batman knowing everything before it happens, having it all planned out, benching 600 pound coffin lids, and yet unable to catch a man with no visible super powers and apparently his Dad's age. Didn't see the 'ol helicopter exit coming eh Batman?

And whats with the fact he punched the glass in and it blew up? And whats Nightwing doing standing posing with the cape, no-one can see you, how about looking for Batman? If you read too, Hurt tells Bruce next time he wears the cape and cowl it'll be his last so I take it their trying to set up FC then.

Still despite my cyncism I have to say I enjoyed it right the way through, and am quite eager to see where they go with it. Can't wait til this time next year, I can tell the first couple of months of the new Batman and Robin will either be all "This is how Bruce would have wanted it" or "Lets take on an old foe our way, and treat old allies differently" but when it settles in it should be good

[nixon]

Maybe the relationship between Hurt and Bruce is supposed to be a reflection of Batman's relationship with Damian, playing on his paranoia because each story involves some masterplan playing out around him - Talia's seduction followed by the embyro manipulation, which is equal to Hurt/Wayne's masterplan to break Bruce, something in the background which he was oblivious to, perhaps from the very beginning with Joe Chill, though I reject that completely.

[Kiryu]

If it is maybe Thomas Wayne, was it ever explained why he's such a dick to his own son? I mean they had the whole sordid affair, Martha with a train track of needle marks, drugged out of her mind ect, okay

But how does that make him an insane(ly patient) criminal mastermind


Also, was it ever addressed that it was Bruce that killed that Honor Jackson guy, he gave him the couple hundred that he blew on drugs that killed him in the first issue, was that part of the back-up personality? And whats with the Monk/ Red eye-guy being all super mystical, and then "Yeah I know what you mean, backup your mind Windows XP style!" *note not exact paraphrase*

This all feels very Lost-ish, and I don't just mean the whole answering 1 question whilst leaving a million more for next time. I agree that the devil is stretching it, I mean, and I don't get how both Hurt and Batman both picked Zur-En-Arrh as their respective trigger phrases. Jinx?

And whats the deal with Batman knowing everything before it happens, having it all planned out, benching 600 pound coffin lids, and yet unable to catch a man with no visible super powers and apparently his Dad's age. Didn't see the 'ol helicopter exit coming eh Batman?

And whats with the fact he punched the glass in and it blew up? And whats Nightwing doing standing posing with the cape, no-one can see you, how about looking for Batman? If you read too, Hurt tells Bruce next time he wears the cape and cowl it'll be his last so I take it their trying to set up FC then.

Still despite my cyncism I have to say I enjoyed it right the way through, and am quite eager to see where they go with it. Can't wait til this time next year, I can tell the first couple of months of the new Batman and Robin will either be all "This is how Bruce would have wanted it" or "Lets take on an old foe our way, and treat old allies differently" but when it settles in it should be good


They didn't. Batman's "Zur-En-Arrh" personality was a response that would be triggered by any mental attack that incapacitated him as Batman. Hence the issue where he walks with Honor Jackson, letting the "Zur-En-Arrh" personality "boot up" as it were. Bat-Mite also told us that Batman's ZEA Hallucination came out during the isolation experiment and that gave Hurt the idea to use "Zur-En-Arrh". I'm of the mind that the ZEA personality shaped itself around the trigger Hurt used instead of Bruce basing on the words. By that I mean, if a different trigger had been used the "Back-Up" personality might have been different.

But then again, we don't know the methods by which Bruce created the Batman of Zur-En-Arrh. It's possible that whatever he did to create it let him gleam some bit of knowledge from his subconcionous and crafted the ZEA Personality from that.

But, Dr Hurt became aware of the ZEA hallucination and that is what prompted him to use Zur-En-Arrh.

[philly]

There are a lot of smart, insightful posts about this story in this thread, so I am a little intimidated to give my dumb ass comic book guy review but here goes.

I thought this was the best Batman story i've read (in the in-continuity ongoings) in the past 3+ years I have been back reading comics. I don't know who Dr Hurt is (I don't believe it's really Thomas Wayne) but it doesn't affect my enjoyment of the story. The conclusion to RIP is like one of those endings in tv and film (like the Prisoner or Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?) that has you asking questions at the end. This will be one of the few story arcs in recent comics that I look forward to rereading to pick up on all the stuff many posters here picked up on. And I am not a Morrison apologist. I've only read All Star Superman, 7 Soldiers Frankenstein and his Adam Strange one shot. Batman RIP was just a fun ride and I am sorry that Morrison is done with this book.

Anyway, I enjoyed it. And I enjoyed Morrison's run more than most everything Dini's done with Detective (although the finish to the Hush story was good and I liked the Facade and Globe stories).

I agree with you 100 %. I thought it was a great run and i hope Morrison comes back for more.

[lawman]

Did you even bother to read everyone else's understanding of this?
I've read several (but not all 36!) pages of this thread, plus other threads on this and other boards, plus commentary on a number of blogs. I'll stand by what I wrote, thanks.

Did someone post some crucial insight you think I missed? Or is your complaint merely that I'm echoing the views of others? If it's the latter, I'm happy to add my voice to the chorus.

If it's the former, though, and you really think I've overlooked some interpretation of the villain's identity here that's actually satisfying... please, feel free to share.

[Buried Alien]

They didn't. Batman's "Zur-En-Arrh" personality was a response that would be triggered by any mental attack that incapacitated him as Batman.

Hmm...but Batman has been subjected to various forms of mental attack over the years. Joker, Scarecrow, Ra's Al Ghul, Bane, Hush, even Deacon Blackfire from THE CULT...each of them has used various forms of mental attack against Batman over the years (and this doesn't even begin to cover when Batman was subjected to various forms of alien and mystic mental attacks during his various adventures with the Justice League and the Outsiders over the years).

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

[Kiryu]

Hmm...but Batman has been subjected to various forms of mental attack over the years. Joker, Scarecrow, Ra's Al Ghul, Bane, Hush, even Deacon Blackfire from THE CULT...each of them has used various forms of mental attack against Batman over the years (and this doesn't even begin to cover when Batman was subjected to various forms of alien and mystic mental attacks during his various adventures with the Justice League and the Outsiders over the years).

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

But we know the Zur-En-Arrh personality was created after the events of 52. Which means its only been there since "Face the Face".

EDIT: It's implied this much is so, because Batman did not undergo the Thogal til the events of 52, and he first mentions his back-up personality to the monk after he's already undergone Thogal.

[Captain Jim]

I didn't know that. For some reason I thought he was upset about Final Crisis and leaving superhero books. Thanks for the heads up.

My understanding is that he wants to leave superhero books with the exception of Batman.

[Captain Jim]

There was hardly any way for this story to avoid being profoundly unsatisfying (http://blog.smartmemes.com/2008/12/batman-really-infuriatingly-pointless/).


I loved these lines in the above review: :biggrin:


we’re given massive hints throughout the story that he is actually… no, really… the Devil. As dramatic revelations go, that’s not “shocking,” that’s embarrassing. In an attempt to be profound, it comes across as ridiculous.

I agree, btw.

[pariah-1972]

Considering all the delays and knowing how Didio works i am placing my bets that this was heavily re-written heck this even reads like it was to me.

[Harding Prime]

But we know the Zur-En-Arrh personality was created after the events of 52. Which means its only been there since "Face the Face".

EDIT: It's implied this much is so, because Batman did not undergo the Thogal til the events of 52, and he first mentions his back-up personality to the monk after he's already undergone Thogal.

I thought he created Zur-En-Arrh when he was a subject of Dr. Hurt in the Chamber, which was back in the day.


P.S. - Does anyone know this, and all new comics for that matter, come out today or tomorrow because of the holiday. Save me a trip....

[carabas]

I thought he created Zur-En-Arrh when he was a subject of Dr. Hurt in the Chamber, which was back in the day.
According to #679, Zur-En-Arrh is something Bruce that case boiling up from Bruce's subconscious while under attack from a villain who used hallucinogenic gas on him (a Prof. Milo - a quick spot of google teaches us that in that story, Detective #247, Batman was forced to abandon the Batman identity, but created a new one to use instead: Starman (probably no relation to the JSAer of the same name).

During the isolation experiment, this stuff came out again, and Hurt used Zur-En-Arrh as a post-hypnotic thingy to shut down Batman.

The story never goes into when exactly Bruce fashioned the Zur-En-Arrh experience into a backup personality, but logic and continuity sugest it was done fairly recently.
This is one of those times when strickt continuity really hurts story-telling - can't give Batman a weapon against mental attackes, because continuity shows him mentally attacked lots of times, and he didn't use it. Bah. Frell strickt continuity.

[lawman]

Bah. Frell strickt continuity.
Yeah, right. Build your story around cherry-picked details of fifty-year-old stories, but "frell strict continuity." :rolleyes: That sort of eat-your-cake-and-have-it-too mentality is definitely one of the (many) problems with Grant's approach in "R.I.P."... although to his credit, I don't think he's been as explicit about it as you are here.

Is there any reason we as readers should feel compelled to go along with the rather short-sighted notion that this story is the only one that really matters?

Especially given that problems with continuity certainly aren't the only defects in story logic...

[Jake V]

Is there any reason we as readers should feel compelled to go along with the rather short-sighted notion that this story is the only one that really matters?

I think this story "matters" just as much as any other story, and that entirely depends on the reader.

[DarKye]

The story never goes into when exactly Bruce fashioned the Zur-En-Arrh experience into a backup personality, but logic and continuity sugest it was done fairly recently.
This is one of those times when strickt continuity really hurts story-telling - can't give Batman a weapon against mental attackes, because continuity shows him mentally attacked lots of times, and he didn't use it. Bah. Frell strickt continuity.

It's pretty easy to solve, continuity wise.

Batman was primed NOT to see the word Zur-En-Arrh until it was too late. That happened way back during the isolation experiment after it first started coming out. So all through the years, Batman didn't know about it at all.

Looking deep into himself during Thögal, he found it (or something like it) again and got the idea of using it as a backup personality.

Except that he obviously couldn't remember it. He couldn't even see the word in front of his own eyes until Jezebel spoke the line, triggering the attack.
However, once this happened, he was made aware of it once again and managed to use the trauma from his childhood (when Zur-En-Arrh was first recorded in his mind) to recreate himself.

[lawman]

It's pretty easy to solve, continuity wise.

Batman was primed NOT to see the word Zur-En-Arrh until it was too late. That happened way back during the isolation experiment after it first started coming out. So all through the years, Batman didn't know about it at all.

Looking deep into himself during Thögal, he found it (or something like it) again and got the idea of using it as a backup personality.

Except that he obviously couldn't remember it. He couldn't even see the word in front of his own eyes until Jezebel spoke the line, triggering the attack.
However, once this happened, he was made aware of it once again and managed to use the trauma from his childhood (when Zur-En-Arrh was first recorded in his mind) to recreate himself.
Yeah, that kinda sorta makes sense.

Except that it's too complicated by half, as story hooks go... and given the way it was parceled out piecemeal over two years of issues, it's obviously not exactly crystal clear to readers even at the end.

[Sizzle]

I just read it today, I thought it was executed quite poorly. I thought the idea of Batman knowing what was going on all along was great, but it did not play out well in the pages, maybe it was rushed.

The ending was so soap opera it's not even funny. Oh well, hopefully I won't be suffering too much till Bruce comes back. Looking at the first page of RIP, the "Batman and Robin can never die" page, I think that Robin is Damien. So I'll be very turned off by that. Unless the Batman is Tim, but he'd have to take a lot of 'roids to get that big.

[the-wolf]

I loved these lines in the above review: :biggrin:



I agree, btw.

Bang-on. More and more this story seems, to me, to be a re-hash of Knightfall and Prodigal, only written as if the author is on LSD. There's nothing new here and the author of that article is right on every single point. What was the point? An ego trip? Nothing debated on these boards was ever explained and really, most fans' speculation would've made for a better story than GM's.

[The Batman]

Just got the chance to read this today and I enjoyed it. I'm glad I was wrong about Bruce Wayne being the Black Glove, bent on destroying Batman for taking his life. I think what we got is ultimately more interesting.

Some quick, random thoughts (with apologies if I'm repeating too much of what's already been said; i haven't read through this thread yet):

The fate worse then death - The Black Glove threatens Batman with one fate - becoming a brain damaged servant of evil - that's worse than death but it is avoided. Instead it seems the fate worse than death for Batman is to continue being Morrison's Batgod. All of Bruce's paranoia is justified through this story isn't it? His endless plotting and prepping is demonstrated to be necessary and wise because evil is around every corner and out to take him down hard. Trust no one and nothing. There are threats everywhere. His instinct to not trust love is demonstrated to be correct because Jezebel does indeed turn out to be a threat. The Black Glove doesn't make it so that Batman can never trust another woman ever again; they just further reinforced in his mind that he shouldn't trust another woman ever again. The fate worse than death is to be the Batgod, a creature of ridiculous paranoia unable to completely trust or to love or to even rest in peace.

2) Who is the Black Glove? - Does it really matter? Whether it's Mangrove Pierce or Dr. Hurt it's really just window dressing isn't it? It's all just fashion, a garment worn by the devil. But I don't think we're supposed to take it as the guy with the horns, the tail, and the pitchfork or the guy that decided to trade Aunt May for Spider-Man's marriage. I think the Devil that Grant is talking about is bigger and more timeless. A constant that manifests itself in countless ways big and small. The thing that Batman has been battling against in all its myriad forms. I thought it was interesting that the members of the Black Glove, even Jet, were in many ways stock villains. The Generalissimo, the Corrupt Priest, the Femme Fatale, the Corporate Man . . . all examples of the variaties of evil in the world; all places were the Devil could do his work.

At least, I think.

I could be (and probably am) wrong about this. It might end up being The Devil, complete with crimson spandex suit. It might be Darkseid, whose fall through reality in DC Universe #0 has permeated every its very being tipping its balance from good to evil and giving the Black Glove the upper hand.

I'm going to go through this thread and then, over the Christmas break, through all of Morrison's run. Again. I can't wait to see what I find.

[Lew Moxon]

I think I agree with you and a poster who said Hurt isn't the Horn's and tale got kicked out of heaven because he wanted to be God, Biblical Satan.

Hurt, is a tulpa of what would be considered ultimate evil, in Bruces mind.

How Hurt came to be that, is anyones guess.

[zur en arrh]

2) Who is the Black Glove? - Does it really matter? Whether it's Mangrove Pierce or Dr. Hurt it's really just window dressing isn't it? It's all just fashion, a garment worn by the devil. But I don't think we're supposed to take it as the guy with the horns, the tail, and the pitchfork or the guy that decided to trade Aunt May for Spider-Man's marriage. I think the Devil that Grant is talking about is bigger and more timeless. A constant that manifests itself in countless ways big and small. The thing that Batman has been battling against in all its myriad forms. I thought it was interesting that the members of the Black Glove, even Jet, were in many ways stock villains. The Generalissimo, the Corrupt Priest, the Femme Fatale, the Corporate Man . . . all examples of the variaties of evil in the world; all places were the Devil could do his work.


Bingo. Good post.

[the-wolf]

The fate worse then death - The Black Glove threatens Batman with one fate - becoming a brain damaged servant of evil - that's worse than death but it is avoided. Instead it seems the fate worse than death for Batman is to continue being Morrison's Batgod. All of Bruce's paranoia is justified through this story isn't it? His endless plotting and prepping is demonstrated to be necessary and wise because evil is around every corner and out to take him down hard. Trust no one and nothing. There are threats everywhere. His instinct to not trust love is demonstrated to be correct because Jezebel does indeed turn out to be a threat. The Black Glove doesn't make it so that Batman can never trust another woman ever again; they just further reinforced in his mind that he shouldn't trust another woman ever again. The fate worse than death is to be the Batgod, a creature of ridiculous paranoia unable to completely trust or to love or to even rest in peace.

2) Who is the Black Glove? - Does it really matter? Whether it's Mangrove Pierce or Dr. Hurt it's really just window dressing isn't it? It's all just fashion, a garment worn by the devil. But I don't think we're supposed to take it as the guy with the horns, the tail, and the pitchfork or the guy that decided to trade Aunt May for Spider-Man's marriage. I think the Devil that Grant is talking about is bigger and more timeless. A constant that manifests itself in countless ways big and small. The thing that Batman has been battling against in all its myriad forms. I thought it was interesting that the members of the Black Glove, even Jet, were in many ways stock villains. The Generalissimo, the Corrupt Priest, the Femme Fatale, the Corporate Man . . . all examples of the variaties of evil in the world; all places were the Devil could do his work.

I don't like what GM's done on his run at all, but....very eloquently put.

[oanswat]

Zurrenarrgh= Zorro in Arkham.

It's the trigger phrase that he's lived with his whole life and it somehow relates but hell if I know how. I need to read all the issues from before the main R.I.P. story I think to really understand what happened.

When is this stuff coming out on trade?

[oanswat]

According to #679, Zur-En-Arrh is something Bruce that case boiling up from Bruce's subconscious while under attack from a villain who used hallucinogenic gas on him (a Prof. Milo - a quick spot of google teaches us that in that story, Detective #247, Batman was forced to abandon the Batman identity, but created a new one to use instead: Starman (probably no relation to the JSAer of the same name).

During the isolation experiment, this stuff came out again, and Hurt used Zur-En-Arrh as a post-hypnotic thingy to shut down Batman.

The story never goes into when exactly Bruce fashioned the Zur-En-Arrh experience into a backup personality, but logic and continuity sugest it was done fairly recently.
This is one of those times when strickt continuity really hurts story-telling - can't give Batman a weapon against mental attackes, because continuity shows him mentally attacked lots of times, and he didn't use it. Bah. Frell strickt continuity.

So "zorro in arkham" was the last thing he said as an innocent before his parents were killed.

He formed a new identity to protect him unconciously from feeling hurt.

Think about that last sentence. It applies in two different ways during two different times in his life. Zurrenarrgh was his angry boy side that he hid from himself and doctor hurt used it against him. It was a trigger to use and hurt found out.

Then during thogal batman realized that it was there and fixed himself enough to be able to defend himself from a true psychological attack.

Is this what I'm to gain from this story or am I way off base here?

[Mat001]

So "zorro in arkham" was the last thing he said as an innocent before his parents were killed.

He formed a new identity to protect him unconciously from feeling hurt.

Think about that last sentence. It applies in two different ways during two different times in his life. Zurrenarrgh was his angry boy side that he hid from himself and doctor hurt used it against him. It was a trigger to use and hurt found out.

Then during thogal batman realized that it was there and fixed himself enough to be able to defend himself from a true psychological attack.

Is this what I'm to gain from this story or am I way off base here?

I think that's about 90% right.

[Captain Jim]

I need to read all the issues from before the main R.I.P. story I think to really understand what happened.

When is this stuff coming out on trade?

Reading the earlier material is not only helpful, I'd say it's essential. The earlier material is already available in trade, I believe. The RIP issues will be released as an oversized hardcover on February 4, for 25 bucks.

[Paul McEnery]

Reading the earlier material is not only helpful, I'd say it's essential. The earlier material is already available in trade, I believe. The RIP issues will be released as an oversized hardcover on February 4, for 25 bucks.

Are they including in the current/last two/FC-related issues?

[AlistairCrane]

Reading the earlier material is not only helpful, I'd say it's essential. The earlier material is already available in trade, I believe. The RIP issues will be released as an oversized hardcover on February 4, for 25 bucks.

I haven't read Morrison's previous issues and I wouldn't say it's essential. I managed to get through RIP just fine. I knew who Damian and Jet were through message boards, though.

[Sidepocket]

Just got the chance to read this today and I enjoyed it. I'm glad I was wrong about Bruce Wayne being the Black Glove, bent on destroying Batman for taking his life. I think what we got is ultimately more interesting.

Some quick, random thoughts (with apologies if I'm repeating too much of what's already been said; i haven't read through this thread yet):

The fate worse then death - The Black Glove threatens Batman with one fate - becoming a brain damaged servant of evil - that's worse than death but it is avoided. Instead it seems the fate worse than death for Batman is to continue being Morrison's Batgod. All of Bruce's paranoia is justified through this story isn't it? His endless plotting and prepping is demonstrated to be necessary and wise because evil is around every corner and out to take him down hard. Trust no one and nothing. There are threats everywhere. His instinct to not trust love is demonstrated to be correct because Jezebel does indeed turn out to be a threat. The Black Glove doesn't make it so that Batman can never trust another woman ever again; they just further reinforced in his mind that he shouldn't trust another woman ever again. The fate worse than death is to be the Batgod, a creature of ridiculous paranoia unable to completely trust or to love or to even rest in peace.

2) Who is the Black Glove? - Does it really matter? Whether it's Mangrove Pierce or Dr. Hurt it's really just window dressing isn't it? It's all just fashion, a garment worn by the devil. But I don't think we're supposed to take it as the guy with the horns, the tail, and the pitchfork or the guy that decided to trade Aunt May for Spider-Man's marriage. I think the Devil that Grant is talking about is bigger and more timeless. A constant that manifests itself in countless ways big and small. The thing that Batman has been battling against in all its myriad forms. I thought it was interesting that the members of the Black Glove, even Jet, were in many ways stock villains. The Generalissimo, the Corrupt Priest, the Femme Fatale, the Corporate Man . . . all examples of the variaties of evil in the world; all places were the Devil could do his work.

At least, I think.

I could be (and probably am) wrong about this. It might end up being The Devil, complete with crimson spandex suit. It might be Darkseid, whose fall through reality in DC Universe #0 has permeated every its very being tipping its balance from good to evil and giving the Black Glove the upper hand.

I'm going to go through this thread and then, over the Christmas break, through all of Morrison's run. Again. I can't wait to see what I find.

1) So the alternative is for Bruce to hand it off to someone else and have them suffer for it?

2)That is not the devil. That is evil. I think the problem is "the devil" is such a stupid term. It is impossible to say it without some hick voice in the back of your head. :rolleyes:

[Paul McEnery]

1) So the alternative is for Bruce to hand it off to someone else and have them suffer for it?

2)That is not the devil. That is evil. I think the problem is "the devil" is such a stupid term. It is impossible to say it without some hick voice in the back of your head. :rolleyes:

Not so much if you're into the whole occult thing. At which point, "The Devil" is just a tarot card with symbolic meaning relative to the other symbols in the deck. Speaking metaphorically, of course.

[lawman]

That is not the devil. That is evil. I think the problem is "the devil" is such a stupid term. It is impossible to say it without some hick voice in the back of your head. :rolleyes:
I think you've just put your finger on exactly why I objected so strongly to this aspect of the story.

[dotdotdot]

I think you've just put your finger on exactly why I objected so strongly to this aspect of the story.

thankfully, "the devil" is no more an answer to the great mystery than it's ever been.

[Captain Jim]

I haven't read Morrison's previous issues and I wouldn't say it's essential. I managed to get through RIP just fine. I knew who Damian and Jet were through message boards, though.

It may be possible to follow the storyline, but you certainly aren't going to pick up on everything. And my hunch is, if people go back and read the preceeding issues, they will be surprised at how much they didn't pick up on.

(A general statement, not directed at Alistair in particular.)

[Captain Jim]

Are they including in the current/last two/FC-related issues?

I don't believe so.

[Kiryu]

I don't believe so.

They are. RIP Collects the RIP lead-in without Tony Daniel, then RIP-683.

[Kiryu]

This just popped into my head. Why is Thomas Wayne a good man on the Anti-Matter Earth in Morrison's JLA: Earth-2 if everything on the Anti-Matter Earth is opposite from the DCU "New Earth".

[carabas]

I wouldn't exactly call him a good man. Just less evil than Gordon and Owlman. Or differantly evil.

[Mia]

I just read the whole series in its' entirety and I must say that it was very enjoyable! I can see why it sold so well. DC should consider making an animated film about this story. It would be a lot of fun. I especially liked the way in which Bruce thought several steps ahead of everyone and considered many contingency plans. He really is a brilliant strategist, it's why I love the character. Bravo to Grant Morrison!