CBR: DC E-i-C Bob Harras On Batman's New Normal

**CBR News** · 11-03-2010, 11:07 AM

With the line-shifting game changer that has hit the Dark Knight in today's "Batman & Robin" #16, DC Editor-in-Chief Bob Harras swings by to explain how Bruce Wayne's return will affect not just his life but the entire world of Gotham City.

Full article here.

**Johnny Triangles** · 11-03-2010, 12:09 PM

How exactly does this move make the public doubt more than ever that Bruce Wayne could be Batman. That's just dumb. I really don't get DC logic. This is almost as dumb as when DC claimed for years that the average Gotham citizen thinks Batman is an urban legend.

**Mr. Holmes** · 11-03-2010, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by Johnny Triangles

How exactly does this move make the public doubt more than ever that Bruce Wayne could be Batman.

Whether you agree with the logic or not is a separate issue, but now the people of Gotham think Bruce encountered Batman, and decided to help him. Any suspicions that Bruce could be Batman have been translated to a confirmation that he's helping him.

That's just dumb. I really don't get DC logic. This is almost as dumb as when DC claimed for years that the average Gotham citizen thinks Batman is an urban legend.

This is as dumb as Clark Kent wearing glasses, or people thinking Batman is an urban legend, like you said (ie dumb as most comic tropes). You should be used to comic book logic by now.

**Jack J Napier** · 11-03-2010, 12:14 PM

this is bloody stupid. this is it for me batman books.

**Johnny Triangles** · 11-03-2010, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by neogod557

Whether you agree with the logic or not is a separate issue, but now the people of Gotham think Bruce encountered Batman, and decided to help him. Any suspicions that Bruce could be Batman have been translated to a confirmation that he's helping him.

This is as dumb as Clark Kent wearing glasses, or people thinking Batman is an urban legend, like you said (ie dumb as most comic tropes). You should be used to comic book logic by now.

Clark Kent using glasses as a disguise was for back when the average comic fan was 8 years old and much less sophisticated and more naive because it was the 30s-60s. Dumb, but much more forgivable. Batman as urban legend and Bruce Wayne revealing he funds Batman to convince people he isn't Batman are done in the 2000s when the audience is much more sophisticated and the average reader age is the 30+.

I'm not against Bruce Wayne revealing he's Batman to the public, but there has to be a less stupid reason than "By revealing concrete ties to Batman, now NO ONE will EVER suspect I AM Batman!" If anything, I think that would make the idea he was Batman MORE plausible, not LESS.

**Jimmy Bond** · 11-03-2010, 12:23 PM

Good day, sir.

I knew this would divide us into two camps, pro and anti. The latter can jump off the bandwagon, but just don't let that door hit you on the way out.

**Mr. Holmes** · 11-03-2010, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by Johnny Triangles

Clark Kent using glasses as a disguise was for back when the average comic fan was 8 years old and much less sophisticated and more naive because it was the 30s-60s. Dumb, but much more forgivable. Batman as urban legend and Bruce Wayne revealing he funds Batman to convince people he isn't Batman are done in the 2000s when the audience is much more sophisticated and the average reader age is the 30+.

Age demographic is irrelevant. You should be used to suspending your belief by now.

If anything, I think that would make the idea he was Batman MORE plausible, not LESS.

Then we'll have to just disagree. I think the explanation most people believe is that Batman consists of multiple people, because one person couldn't take that burden. So the idea of Bruce funding all of that enforces that idea. Either way, whether the idea of him being Batman is more or less plausible doesn't effect anything.

**POWRSURG** · 11-03-2010, 12:44 PM

So Bruce Wayne is now old school Tony Stark?

**Johnny Triangles** · 11-03-2010, 12:47 PM

Originally Posted by POWRSURG

So Bruce Wayne is now old school Tony Stark?

Yup, like Tony Stark was the businessman behind Iron Man's toys, Bruce Wayne is now the businessman behind Batman's toys.

**rpriske** · 11-03-2010, 01:03 PM

Best concept in a Batman book for quite some time. I had dropped all the Batman books but this is pulling me back in.

**stillanerd** · 11-03-2010, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by Johnny Triangles

Yup, like Tony Stark was the businessman behind Iron Man's toys, Bruce Wayne is now the businessman behind Batman's toys.

And in the current comics, everyone now knows Tony Stark is Iron Man. Perhaps because, even though it's plausible that Iron Man could be an "employee" of Stark Industries and not actually Tony himself, it still paints a huge target on Tony and that, at some point, it would make it even more likely someone would eventually make the connection that Tony and Iron Man are one at the same, which happened quite a bit if I'm not mistaken. So the idea that it would make it harder for anyone to suspect Bruce is Batman because he's financing Batman and is going to be creating a private international law enforcement agency of other Batmen is a bit far-fetched.

**The All-Seeing Eye of Agamotto** · 11-03-2010, 01:13 PM

So Batman dies (shortly after Captain America)
is replaced by his sidekick (like Captain America)
comes back to life (like the real Captain America)
decides to let his old partner remain in the role (sound familiar?)
and assumes a new big daddy role over all the bat-books (like Steve Rogers and the Avengers books)

Doesn't DC have one gram of creativity?

Can't they at least steal their ideas from more than one source?

**BrotherUnitNo_4** · 11-03-2010, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by The All-Seeing Eye of Agamotto

So Batman dies (shortly after Captain America)
is replaced by his sidekick (like Captain America)
comes back to life (like the real Captain America)
decides to let his old partner remain in the role (sound familiar?)
and assumes a new big daddy role over all the bat-books (like Steve Rogers and the Avengers books)

Doesn't DC have one gram of creativity?

Can't they at least steal their ideas from more than one source?

Stories aren't planned overnight. I imagine Morrison had this planned back from the start.

**Mr. Holmes** · 11-03-2010, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by The All-Seeing Eye of Agamotto

So Batman dies (shortly after Captain America)

Except he didn't die.

comes back to life (like the real Captain America)

Except he didn't die.

decides to let his old partner remain in the role (sound familiar?)

And you conveniently forget that unlike Steve, he's also in the role. There aren't two Captain Americas.

and assumes a new big daddy role over all the bat-books (like Steve Rogers and the Avengers books)

Bruce has always had a "big daddy role" over all of the bat-books. All the bat-books were always spin-offs of the Batman book itself. Superman has had a big daddy role over all of the super-books. I don't get what you are saying.

Doesn't DC have one gram of creativity?

Can't they at least steal their ideas from more than one source?

Having common, broad generalizations isn't stealing from a source. Especially if you don't get the parts of this story that are actually important, like Barbatos, Doctor Hurt, and Darkseid. Not to mention Batman had the time traveling thing first.