PDA

View Full Version : A thematic analysis of the Morrison run



El Sombrero
08-25-2011, 08:45 AM
Some of this stuff is probably obvious or taken for granted, but I was thinking about this the other day and it really made me appreciate the entirety of the Morrison run as a longer narrative as opposed to separate stories.

I think the real "point" or theme of the Morrison run is the personal growth of Bruce Wayne. This works pretty well with each separate run.

In Morrison's initial Batman run, Bruce is quite literally haunted by his dreams. While all people have bad dreams, children are especially terrified of their dreams and have trouble accepting that they are not indicative of reality. Bruce has to deal with his immature fears related to these dreams that he still has not conquered: the gun, the idea that there is someone better than him, the dark side of what he does; respectively, the Three Ghosts of Batman.

Bruce is also a bit self-centered in this part of the run. Not to a crazy degree, but he spends a lot of time galavanting around with Jet, going skiing and not really doing much of meaning with his life, not really reaching his full potential. He's acting like a kid.

Damian serves as an intervention in Bruce's life, a signal that he has to grow up. Bruce cannot have these fears anymore if he is to be a father. He has to do more in the world. It is very appropriate that the arrival of Damian triggers these fears in Bruce's dreams, as it's really a scary wake-up call for Bruce. Damian is even a reminder that Bruce has to be more responsible for himself. He slept with Talia (whether this was consensual or not is kind of irrelevant). He has to take responsibility for his actions and finally man up.

RIP is quite literally Bruce versus his darkest dreams, as he creates the Zur En Arrh personality as kind of a childish fantasy and reaction against reality. Zur En Arrh is undoubtedly the work of a child, complemented by the goofy cartoon Bat-Mite, literally a figment of imagination (the fifth dimension).

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Yv74a8XkxJI/S4GbIDrOf7I/AAAAAAAAFWQ/kt9NGmks2uM/s400/Batman+%23678+-+Page+23.jpg

Dr Hurt is the representation of all of Bruce's fears. It is so appropriate that he takes the persona of Thomas Wayne, Bruce's lost father and his biggest fear and source of trauma in his life. Bruce has defeat Hurt to defeat the memory of his father. It's kind of a f***ed up form of therapy but Batman is kind of a f***ed up reaction in general.

This "childish Bruce" is complemented by the art choices of the run. Andy Kubert does big, bold superheroics, the type of art that would appeal to kids. Tony Daniel then nicely transitions these superheroics into the weird horror of having to face down your dreams and fears in the eerie patterns and visual motifs of the RIP arc.

Child Bruce really even faces his fears in sort of a stupid / dumbed down way, with all the deus ex machinas in the RIP arc, the "grim and gritty" feel of a lot of stuff there, and the "Bat-God" stuff. It's the way a child would tackle these problems, with brute force and attitude instead of elegance or strategy. Batman must figuratively go through these childish narrative hurdles (put in place by generations of real-life Batman writers) one last time, before he completely faces his ultimate fears and uses the gun against Darkseid, where he (child Bruce) "dies" as he is ready to move on in life.

Batman and Robin is then a tale of puberty or adolescence. Both the Batman and Robin in the story struggle with their identity and who they really are. Nothing is taken for granted anymore and they have to adapt to a new and scary world. I thought it was smart on Morrison's part to use a different character than Bruce here, as it makes things feel less predictable and even more "unsure of itself."

The art choices really complement what Morrison is going for here, as Quitely and Irving in particular are so full of weirdness and the uncomfortable qualities of adolescence / puberty. The prospect of growing up into this new world is terrifying for Batman and Robin. Are they ready for this?

http://readrant.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/batman-and-robin-2.jpg?w=450&h=684

Dick and Damian are able to really bond with each other and exceed expectations. They are able to truly grow up together and accept their roles and demands in the world. Nobody thought they could be Batman and Robin, but they did it. They are ready to move into adulthood.

At the same time, we meet Bruce who has been almost literally "born again" at the end of Return of Bruce Wayne. Bruce has learned the true secret of Batman, that "Batman was never really alone" (or however Morrison phrased it). This is the key line of Morrison's entire run. Batman was able to move past the childish notion that he is a "loner," "outsider," or better off by himself. He is a true adult now, ready to face the world and trust others, and reach his full potential.

Going back to the earlier note about Bruce being self-centered in the first part of Morrison's run, Bruce has now realized that he needs to give back and do the best he can for future generations. This directly triggers his desire to go global with Batman. There's more to the world than Gotham. It's almost impossible to imagine a Batman of five years ago trusting random heroes across the globe, but this Bruce has grown up and he does, welcoming others into his Batman family simply because it's the right thing to do for the greater good. It's also healthy to have friends. What sane person wouldn't want that? Bruce is now ready to trust and accept others.

The Bruce of Inc is completely grown up and confident in his abilities. He doesn't play around with Selina anymore, he simply calls her up to come along to Japan for a fling. He's less paranoid about his secret identity and straight up aligns himself with Batman in the public sphere. He figuratively shares Bruce with the world and literally shares Batman with the world.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_j4RPhrM-8Fw/TOWr0CKa-pI/AAAAAAAABeQ/Fhl0DxmunHc/s1600/batcatbatmaninc01.JPG

Again, the art is perfect to symbolize this, as Yanick Paquette is so bold, sexy and confident, and Chris Burnham is devoid of pretension and fear, just full of the simple love of life.

Where are we headed in Leviathan? Morrison has teased about loss and emotional sadness. I would guess that Bruce will now have to now face his fears and trauma in a healthy way as an adult. As we age we eventually lose things literally and figuratively and must accept that.

If Morrison continues with his run after Inc / Leviathan, I would expect him to further this theme through something like "Bruce as an elder" preparing for his death or ready to pass his legacy on, or perhaps the long-expected future Damian arc where we would truly see how Bruce's legacy has been received.

http://www.comicbookbin.com/artman2/uploads/3/batman666.jpg

Android
08-25-2011, 09:52 AM
Very interesting.

I don't know if i would say thats the main thematic focus, but the connotations are certainly there. Didn't expect to read anything i hadn't already thought of read before, so kudos.

And it's always fun to sit and have a think about Morrisons Bat-run so far.

Ben D
08-25-2011, 09:54 AM
I love the Morrison run, but I kind of hope he either takes a break or just leaves Batman after Leviathan.

Munkiman
08-25-2011, 10:33 AM
Very good points, I had never thought about it that way. Makes a lot of sense - Bruce's loner attitude always seemed pretty adolescent, even childish, and that's what Morrison has been trying to move away from. Batman and Robin as puberty, complete with identity crisis and a scary new world, is a really inspired idea.

It's funny, because Morrison has explicitly described one of his other works, Seaguy, in the same way - the first volume is Seaguy's childhood, the second is adolescence, and the third will be adulthood.

In fact, Morrison has said that the first page of Seaguy references birth - playing chess with Death refers to how the only certain thing when you're first born is, you're going to die. Your move, Seaguy. Meanwhile, what do we see when Bruce first appears in Morrison's first issue of Batman proper? A gun and a bullet, and Bruce unable to stop the shot from being fired. Batman's birth.

In addition to Dr. Hurt representing the trauma of losing Thomas, I also think that Hurt represents Batman's fear that he didn't really know his father. He lost his parents when he was eight - he was too young to be able to think of them objectively as people, they were just mom and dad to him. Hurt preys on that anxiety, and I think is trying to drag Batman into an "adulthood" where Bruce is bitter, jaded and fearful, controlled by his childhood traumas. Reminds me of Dr. Dezard from Mr. Miracle, actually, and how the skills of a psychologist can be misused to mess people up.

It also explains the gun use in Final Crisis - Batman has to work through the traumas that are holding him back. Even though he uses that darkness for good, he has to be able to keep it from dragging him down.

It's also pretty great that Batman Incorporated is the adult phase. He's done with childhood and adolescence and ready to join the workforce! The corporate machine is a positive thing, here, because it means collaboration.

Leviathan could end up meaning anything from death to old age to mid-life crisis. Though technically, each of the three "acts" of Morrison's Batman has had two parts: Batman+Final Crisis, Batman and Robin+Return of Bruce Wayne, Batman Incorporated+Batman: Leviathan, so maybe it'll just continue that adulthood theme from Inc. Who knows?

Anyway, this was a great post, Sombrero, a really good way of looking at the run as a whole. I like that you pointed out how not just the writing, but the art (generally speaking) affects the tone of each act. Nice job!

jgiannantoni05
08-25-2011, 11:44 AM
I'm planning to do a big thread or post analyzing Morrison's run, the themes and big picture stuff. I'm gonna use Morrison interview quotes and everything.

Here's a taste of one thing I will address:
-Batman = "the best secular humanism has to offer".....a tremendously key thing to get about Morrison's run and to understand why Grant used Darkseid and did Hurt the way he did


I've learned that reading and re-reading and thinking about Morrison's interviews in relation to his stories is very helpful.

Predabot
08-25-2011, 01:05 PM
Hmm... if Batman is a humanist, then what is...

DAAAAAARKSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEIIIIIIIIIIIIDDD!! >:-))))

I'm guessing he is some sort of... Inhumanistic Nihilist?

He believes in the absence of choice, of the unimportance of good deeds, of the inability of the masses to govern themselves to any degree. He believes humanity is at its core... a flawed, weak, and purposeless beast.

Yees...

DARKSEID *IS*!

*begins the screaming at the skies, the chanting, the hollering of his name, and the throwing of fists up high*

Munkiman
08-25-2011, 01:07 PM
Hmm... if Batman is a humanist, then what is...

DAAAAAARKSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEIIIIIIIIIIIIDDD!! >:-))))

I'm guessing he is some sort of... Inhumanistic Nihilist?

Darkseid = anti-life.

BlueLily
08-25-2011, 02:50 PM
Terrific thread, El Sombrero! And everybody else who chimed in too. Using Batman's entire history to map his growth as a person. Very awesome.

T Hedge Coke
08-25-2011, 02:59 PM
Superman needs a new origin every fifteen or so years. Batman, on the other hand, needs a "and then he grew up" story.

It's what Knightfall was. The penthouse move before that.

RubberLotus
08-25-2011, 03:32 PM
Hn. Well, upon reading this, I think I can say that Morrison seemed to have a pretty solid (if vague) plan for his work on Batman. It's good to see that he's invested this much time and effort in taking Batman in this particular direction, even if it's a direction that I personally don't care for.

Anyhoo, here are my thoughts on Grant's portrayal of Batman's rogues gallery:

The Joker is, and always will be, a representation of everything that Batman hates and fears. If Batman's personality and "mood" shift from era and era, then so will his. At his core, he represents a power incomprehensible to humans; it quite literally encompasses everything that we can comprehend, and cherry-picks exactly the right combination of concepts, visual signs, etc. to provoke the highest feelings of fear and unease with every puny mortal it encounters.

If pressed, I believe that Joker (Morrison's Joker, at least) could actually be used as a substitute for any Bat-villain. A largely-harmless goofball like Riddler. A force of nature gone awry like Ivy. A tormented, sympathetic soul like Two-Face. In truth, he's the only opponent that Batman really "needs".

This, I believe, is the reason why Grant seems rather reluctant to employ the other Bat-villains in his stories, instead favoring to create new villains. It's a subtle acknowledgment that Riddler, Two-Face, etc. simply don't have the unlimited storytelling potential that Batman and the Joker have. They're people before they're villains, and their characters work best with arcs that have a clearly-defined beginning and end. Dragging their tales on and on and on (yes, Croc, we know you're a sewer-dwelling cannibal; yes, Scarecrow, we know you're obsessed with fear) isn't doing anyone any favors.

So.... anyone interested in seeing Grant do something significant with Wonder Woman?

T Hedge Coke
08-25-2011, 03:42 PM
RubberLotus, what did you think of Morrison's use of the other traditional Bat-villains? His Penguin seemed fairly stable, set in a pattern, while Joker of course keeps trying to buck pattern. His Catwoman, too; set, comfortable, expecting. 2-Face-2 accepted he wasn't anything but recycling and synthesizing.

Grayson, unlike Bruce-as-Batman, seems fairly comfortable with Joker, come to think. He figured him out a long time ago, whereas Bruce keeps nearly killing himself or ruining himself trying to understand the Joker.

RubberLotus
08-25-2011, 04:18 PM
RubberLotus, what did you think of Morrison's use of the other traditional Bat-villains? His Penguin seemed fairly stable, set in a pattern, while Joker of course keeps trying to buck pattern. His Catwoman, too; set, comfortable, expecting. 2-Face-2 accepted he wasn't anything but recycling and synthesizing.

Grayson, unlike Bruce-as-Batman, seems fairly comfortable with Joker, come to think. He figured him out a long time ago, whereas Bruce keeps nearly killing himself or ruining himself trying to understand the Joker.

... Morrison used Penguin? And Two-Face?

Seriously, when was this? Was it during Time and the Batman? My above conclusion was largely drawn from the lack of Morrison portrayals of the rest of the classics.

BlueLily
08-25-2011, 04:31 PM
I think Grant Morrison said everything he wanted to about the classic rogues (besides Joker) in Arkham Asylum.

Munkiman
08-25-2011, 07:45 PM
... Morrison used Penguin? And Two-Face?

Seriously, when was this? Was it during Time and the Batman? My above conclusion was largely drawn from the lack of Morrison portrayals of the rest of the classics.

He used the Penguin in the Red Hood arc. He wasn't the principal villain, of course - I had almost forgotten myself. He's pretty much just doing his gang boss thing.

He didn't use Harvey Dent, but in Batman 700's future-set story, Damian fights a villain called 2-Face-2, who is actually a man with a tiny, evil face attached to his cheek like an enormous sentient pimple, which is only active while he's asleep. It's insane.

Morrison has used classic rogues in his run, but other than the Joker they're rarely used as the main antagonist of a story. Joker, Catwoman, Scarecrow and the Riddler were the antagonists of the "YESTERDAY" section of 700, but that was pretty brief; he used Frank Miller's Mutants in the "TODAY" section of 700; the Red Hood isn't really a "classic rogue" but he's not a Morrison creation; and um, would the reimagined versions of the Ten-Eyed Man and Lord Death Man count? Probably not. :tongue: The Joker is the only one with real prominence.

I think generally Morrison prefers mostly creating his own villains, except for the hero's big archenemy - he did the same thing in New X-Men, where all the major villains were new except Magneto. The classic rogues are almost just there for atmosphere, or to give some brief comment on their characters that wouldn't warrant a whole arc.

T Hedge Coke
08-25-2011, 07:49 PM
... Morrison used Penguin? And Two-Face?

Seriously, when was this? Was it during Time and the Batman? My above conclusion was largely drawn from the lack of Morrison portrayals of the rest of the classics.

Penguin is under attack and seeking protection from Batman and Robin in the second Batman and Robin arc.

Time and the Batman had several classic rogues, most of them sounding more or less ripped from the 60s TV show, but no Two-Face, just his future analogue, 2-Face-2 who is accused of being unoriginal and says something like, "I don't originate, I innovate!" before shooting somebody.

The gang of villains in Time... are this close to throwing themselves a party, for all their cliquishness, again, a throwback to how they all used to kind of pal around for the TV series and especially its movie.

Other classic villains Morrison's used lately include Clayface delivering the bomb that nearly kills Lois Lane in Final Crisis and a one sentence summation of Mister Freeze that encapsulates pretty much all of him: "I heard it from Victor Fries while he was giving me frostbite and calling me 'Nora.'" The Ten-Eyed Man, of course, and some of villains of Inc are old old characters, plus the three supermodelesque criminals from Tony Daniel's first issue with Morrison. They're from a sort of explicitly pop criminal issue of old and still fighting over who is the most popular.

T Hedge Coke
08-25-2011, 08:59 PM
So, my mind turns to Westerns and I gotta wonder about Damian as Batman. His dad, of course, was influenced by Zorro, which is arguably a (swashbuckling) Western, but there are Man With No Name elements all over the future Batman. (Does that make Richie Grayson, Marshal Dillon?) Other than Miller and Dixon has anyone done much with Batman in that Western context?

And, it's pr'y worth something to look at the whole run as the synthesis/purification of various tactics of Morrison's, including his supertext (dropping info like bombs for you to pick up and run with outside the story if you trip them, or stay sitting in there if you don't), turning trauma into future awesome (the creation of Batman; the investors of Inc 8), autocritique (RIP; Inc 8), panel/page as time control (Time and the Batman; The Missing Chapter; flashforward to Bruce's funeral), branding (Red Hood's adspeke; Joker's inability to not give himself away with clues).

Munkiman
08-25-2011, 09:03 PM
So, my mind turns to Westerns and I gotta wonder about Damian as Batman. His dad, of course, was influenced by Zorro, which is arguably a (swashbuckling) Western, but there are Man With No Name elements all over the future Batman. (Does that make Richie Grayson, Marshal Dillon?) Other than Miller and Dixon has anyone done much with Batman in that Western context?

Hmm, that's a good point. I personally don't think it fits exactly, but I'm not sure what else would. Bruce had to build Batman from scratch, and his influences definitely included Zorro, and Dracula to a lesser extent. But Damian isn't necessarily influenced by anyone other than his father, because he was born into a world where there already was a Batman.

You know, now that I think about it, I get kind of a noir vibe from Damian. He's anti-heroic and complex, he's got that trench coat... I could see him in black and white. :biggrin:

T Hedge Coke
08-25-2011, 09:16 PM
You know, now that I think about it, I get kind of a noir vibe from Damian. He's anti-heroic and complex, he's got that trench coat... I could see him in black and white. :biggrin:

It's a very 70s/80s neonoir feel to me, more than classic. The same set of genres that birthed his father, I guess, but a different eras. There's a ton of Eastwood in there and DKR (which, I suppose, is more Eastwood). Robocop and Bladerunner, Few Dollars More and Dirty Harry...

(Of course, it's kinda canon now that the 70/80s Gotham had a 30s revival fetish/fashion trend.)

Unfortunately (?), most maps fit most territories if you only look at where they link up. I could make a case for B&R mirroring the Batman movies, with the poison-the-city and sickness of the first arc and the '89 Batman, or the better/different justice of Batman Returns, the maligning of Batman and Bat-methods. The run encourages apophenia.

Scud
08-26-2011, 04:24 AM
Joker, Catwoman, Scarecrow and the Riddler were the antagonists of the "YESTERDAY" section of 700

Don't forget the Mad Hatter!

T Hedge Coke
08-26-2011, 04:37 AM
Don't forget the Mad Hatter!

The Tediously Sane Hatter. :smile:

Did Morrison amp up the proper, Jervis, Hatter to the pervy levels we expect, with his Arkham Asylum, or was it already that way? I can't really remember if I've read an old Mad Hatter story.

batnbreakfast
08-26-2011, 05:02 AM
YOU ARE WRONG!!!

I reckon with Morrison involved everybody is clearly overthinkin' again.

Morrison just wanted to write about Batman AND Jonah Hex. That's why he had to construct the whole timetravellin' romp (just kiddin')

Blue_Beetle
08-26-2011, 05:11 AM
Very good post.

I think Batman & Son was really good and from that to RIP was good, but once Batman Reborn started it just skyrocketed to greatness for me.

ethank
09-01-2011, 01:36 PM
The Tediously Sane Hatter. :smile:

Did Morrison amp up the proper, Jervis, Hatter to the pervy levels we expect, with his Arkham Asylum, or was it already that way? I can't really remember if I've read an old Mad Hatter story.

Morrison was the first to associate the new Jervis with pedophilia. the character had been brought back in the 80s to replace the mustached hat-stealer, and was more or less a chubby dude who carried an ape around. Morrison's portrayal, as well as Gaiman's in Black Orchid helped him get into better shape. By Knightfall he was still bothering with the ape. I think that the Loeb/Sale Hatter stories have much more to do with the character than Morrison or any of the 80's-90's appearances.

sorry, I'm a Mad Hatter dork.

Blue_Beetle
09-01-2011, 03:32 PM
Morrison was the first to associate the new Jervis with pedophilia. the character had been brought back in the 80s to replace the mustached hat-stealer, and was more or less a chubby dude who carried an ape around. Morrison's portrayal, as well as Gaiman's in Black Orchid helped him get into better shape. By Knightfall he was still bothering with the ape. I think that the Loeb/Sale Hatter stories have much more to do with the character than Morrison or any of the 80's-90's appearances.

sorry, I'm a Mad Hatter dork.

Morrison must love Mad Hatter. He put him in Arkham Asylum obviously, he's in the Animal Man run, and he gets the hell beaten out of him in Final Crisis.

Scott Taylor
09-01-2011, 03:39 PM
Darkseid = anti-life.

=Dick Cheney. Its all so clear now!

ethank
09-01-2011, 08:24 PM
Morrison must love Mad Hatter. He put him in Arkham Asylum obviously, he's in the Animal Man run, and he gets the hell beaten out of him in Final Crisis.

He gets some love. Gaiman used him for Black Orchid and his Batman RIP story and Gail Simone made him a main character in Secret Six. Dapper and mad, that's all I ask for.