CBR: When Words Collide - Nov 22, 2010

[CBR News]

As Grant Morrison kicks off a new phase in the Batman franchise, Tim looks back at the writer's years on the character, reflects on what worked and what didn't, and debates the run with guest comics expert Matt Seneca!


Full article here.

[froinlaven]

At least it wasn't as bad as Final Crisis. It was an experiment but at least some of it worked.

[Ironjay]

Little bit one sided when this was billed as a debate

[BONGFORCETRAUMA]

Yeah, that bolding is gonna have to be fixed or I'm not going to be able to follow it.

...Unless it's supposed to be like that?

[TimothyCallahan]

Guys, the bold responses are supposed to be Matt's and the non-bold are supposed to be mine, but it's all screwed up. I should have it fixed soon, and it should make more sense.

Sorry about the weird format problem!

[Seraku]

Guys, the bold responses are supposed to be Matt's and the non-bold are supposed to be mine, but it's all screwed up. I should have it fixed soon, and it should make more sense.

Sorry about the weird format problem!

Thanks, I thought for a sec I was missing something when the non bolded parts started to talk to each other


Still much of what I followed was an interesting read about the run, while I didn't 100% agree with what I gathered to be Seneca, he did make his point very well that I had to pause and think about it.

Good choice for a debate partner, you guys should discuss stuff more often.


edit: Hey you ever thought of I don't know, inviting any up and coming comic blogger to regularly debate something with you on WCW?

[El Sombrero]

Haha I was going to comment about the bolding too.

I agree and disagree with a lot of Seneca's comments. First and foremost I think his tastes are a bit unrealistic with what DC's going to put out. I'd like to have more "forward thinking idea comics," but it's almost impossible to imagine a DCU where every issue out there is just some creator throwing daring ideas at the wall. They are serial comics by nature. As you guys said, this is what you get with DC and Marvel, where you're reading about franchise-style characters and their stories by definition cannot end.

I STRONGLY disagree with the idea that every comic should be accessible to all readers. Yeah, you can argue about the format, but this is either being stubborn or naive, because I think everyone knows by this point that comics should logically be printed directly as trades. The only reason single issues exist anymore is because companies can make more money having people buy their products twice. To expect someone to understand Batman & Robin 16 would be like expecting someone to come into the last 20 minutes of a 2 hour movie and get what's going on. You're supposed to read the whole series (and really Morrison's whole run) the same way you need to watch that whole movie. To make an even more direct analogy, do you really think someone would understand one of the later issues of Watchmen?

I think Seneca completely overlooks / basically ignores that a big part of the Batman & Robin run were the character arcs with Dick and Damian. Morrison wrote these characters extremely well and developed them (and their relationship) in an immensely satisfying way. Basically the whole point of "Batman and Robin" was what Batman & Robin would be like with a DIFFERENT Batman and Robin, you can't just eliminate character work from a critique of these issues. You guys don't even touch on things like Damian meeting Talia in the Andy Clarke arc and saying "I hope I can be a worthy adversary." Little character moments like that that completely sold B&R as a truly special work.

Where I agree with him is that Return of Bruce Wayne was a failure and the Miagani / Black Glove / Wayne family tree / etc were more of a fizzle than a bang. ROBW only really existed to make sense of Morrison's puzzles and I thought it was boring and really unsatisfying as a basic story. For all of the immense hype and effort Morrison took into developing the mystery of The Black Glove, and then the box, the hyperadapter, etc etc, these ideas feel kind of worthless and pointless in the end. They all really reek of Macguffins (sp?) when they initially seemed like so much more. I think Grant starts with these fantastic ideas (Batman vs. The Devil, Batman shooting Darkseid to bring everything full circle) but he waters them down with so much minutiae that they ultimately become tedious and lose their initial luster.

Also I absolutely believe that Grant originally intended for Hurt to be the Devil and nothing more. If you remember, he was initially supposed to end his Batman run with RIP (and Final Crisis). Batman & Robin didn't get formulated till later. At the end of RIP there was no "Wayne family tree" stuff, no ancestor allusions, it was basically the Devil masquerading as his father. This is supported by the constant satanic references, Grant saying the villain is someone "everyone knows," and Grant even literally writing the line "Did I find the Devil waiting?" at the end of RIP. I think when he was called back on to do the B&R run, he wanted to bring Hurt back but needed a new "hook" or mystery, so he tacked the family ancestry / agent of Darkseid thing on. As I've said before I think it's a lot better if it's just the Devil with no added baggage.

There are certainly flaws to pick with Morrison's run, but if Seneca is really questioning whether the whole thing is worth it, or successful, I think he should pretty much move on from mainstream superhero comics. Morrison's Batman run is so far beyond what most other mainstream superhero comics are doing that I feel almost privileged that it even exists.

[Trey]

Haha I was going to comment about the bolding too.

I agree and disagree with a lot of Seneca's comments. First and foremost I think his tastes are a bit unrealistic with what DC's going to put out. I'd like to have more "forward thinking idea comics," but it's almost impossible to imagine a DCU where every issue out there is just some creator throwing daring ideas at the wall. They are serial comics by nature. As you guys said, this is what you get with DC and Marvel, where you're reading about franchise-style characters and their stories by definition cannot end.

I STRONGLY disagree with the idea that every comic should be accessible to all readers. Yeah, you can argue about the format, but this is either being stubborn or naive, because I think everyone knows by this point that comics should logically be printed directly as trades. The only reason single issues exist anymore is because companies can make more money having people buy their products twice. To expect someone to understand Batman & Robin 16 would be like expecting someone to come into the last 20 minutes of a 2 hour movie and get what's going on. You're supposed to read the whole series (and really Morrison's whole run) the same way you need to watch that whole movie. To make an even more direct analogy, do you really think someone would understand one of the later issues of Watchmen?

I think Seneca completely overlooks / basically ignores that a big part of the Batman & Robin run were the character arcs with Dick and Damian. Morrison wrote these characters extremely well and developed them (and their relationship) in an immensely satisfying way. Basically the whole point of "Batman and Robin" was what Batman & Robin would be like with a DIFFERENT Batman and Robin, you can't just eliminate character work from a critique of these issues. You guys don't even touch on things like Damian meeting Talia in the Andy Clarke arc and saying "I hope I can be a worthy adversary." Little character moments like that that completely sold B&R as a truly special work.

Where I agree with him is that Return of Bruce Wayne was a failure and the Miagani / Black Glove / Wayne family tree / etc were more of a fizzle than a bang. ROBW only really existed to make sense of Morrison's puzzles and I thought it was boring and really unsatisfying as a basic story. For all of the immense hype and effort Morrison took into developing the mystery of The Black Glove, and then the box, the hyperadapter, etc etc, these ideas feel kind of worthless and pointless in the end. They all really reek of Macguffins (sp?) when they initially seemed like so much more. I think Grant starts with these fantastic ideas (Batman vs. The Devil, Batman shooting Darkseid to bring everything full circle) but he waters them down with so much minutiae that they ultimately become tedious and lose their initial luster.

Also I absolutely believe that Grant originally intended for Hurt to be the Devil and nothing more. If you remember, he was initially supposed to end his Batman run with RIP (and Final Crisis). Batman & Robin didn't get formulated till later. At the end of RIP there was no "Wayne family tree" stuff, no ancestor allusions, it was basically the Devil masquerading as his father. This is supported by the constant satanic references, Grant saying the villain is someone "everyone knows," and Grant even literally writing the line "Did I find the Devil waiting?" at the end of RIP. I think when he was called back on to do the B&R run, he wanted to bring Hurt back but needed a new "hook" or mystery, so he tacked the family ancestry / agent of Darkseid thing on. As I've said before I think it's a lot better if it's just the Devil with no added baggage.

There are certainly flaws to pick with Morrison's run, but if Seneca is really questioning whether the whole thing is worth it, or successful, I think he should pretty much move on from mainstream superhero comics. Morrison's Batman run is so far beyond what most other mainstream superhero comics are doing that I feel almost privileged that it even exists.

100 percent agree.

Take any long-form story-telling, Lost, Star Wars films/novels, Battlestar Galactica, any serialized work and I'm sorry, its going to loop back to previous events/characters/themes. In fact, thats what makes it such a rich narrative. And really thats why the fanatics are hardcore about this stuff. There is no vacuum.

The success of this type of storytelling is of course related to the quality of the creators. All continuities are not created equal. (I'm looking at you X-men Comics of Certain eras)

No way in hell should a new reader be given Batman and Robin #16. If you gave her RoBW #6, you could have caused irreparable damage. Please be more careful ;.

[numberONE]

While, I'm a big fan of Morrison's run and pretty much liked it all, I agree that Batman and Robin would have been a lot better if Morrison had treated it like a brand new beginning. Building, building, and not looking back just like Kane/Finger. A new Batman and Robin for a new generation. I would have been happy if Bruce never came back.

And, in a perfect world, every issue should be accessible to a new reader, yes but I think it's a little unreasonable to expect this from a story this complex. I don't know if that would read very well as a whole.

[Sakasa]

Well while building is always good, there is an issue with that. Remember the tower of pisa? The ground does not always support it. For instance, why would any one really live in Gotham with joker going out an obliterating a section of the population (Which is a topic we haven't seen in depth enough for me)? But wouldn't it be worst if each contributor had a new villain? It would be flooding Gotham with (more) maniacs. So I think that what Batman Inc brings to the table. More ground to build up from, because as lame as it sounds I consider Gotham its own entity. I like Gotham therefore I like Batman, Gordon, Nightwing, Robin, Not so much spoiler but I like her as Batgirl, Batgirl (Cain), Joker, Mr. Freeze, Riddler, Ra's, ect. Even when I do not like them I like them because I like Gotham. So making massive changes would make Gotham different, which may be good may be terrible. I think the smash and grab writing the Seneca likes is cool and all but having a writer that might not be as good, or is great but has a trouble taping the pieces together the previous left behind makes batman worst. No one wants to be the guy that broke the bat (ha see what I did there).

Now on DCU as a whole batman is different, he was normal, he was small time. This is something that will never change. He doesn't have super hearing, super speed, self powered teleportation. So he needs a reason to be there. Batman is not the lucky character, few Gotham big characters rogue or other wise can ever claim to be lucky more then good. This is where those detective roots come into play. While Seneca just wanted batman to appear to save the day, that isn't batman. Wanting the books to not be intertwined is not batman. Now it is true we rarely have an actual whodoneit or mystery I think Morrison is snapping back, as Callahan put it, is to this. Even so much to make sure it is stated that Batman feels more human in Red Robin. They are bring back what we loved but instead of as a crime fighting machine as a human who wants to protect his own.

[Leocomix]

I doubt any single issue of American Flagg or Black Kiss can be understood by a new reader. They're still some of the best comics ever done.
Going over into literature, who can get Nabokov's Lolita without annotations or a second read-through? Nobody.

Those books teach you a different way to read.

[TimothyCallahan]

Chaykin AND Nabokov in a single post? Are you trying to win my heart??? It works!

[mr.pants]

I doubt any single issue of American Flagg or Black Kiss can be understood by a new reader. They're still some of the best comics ever done.
Going over into literature, who can get Nabokov's Lolita without annotations or a second read-through? Nobody.

Those books teach you a different way to read.

Lolita was one of his easiest pieces. I read it when I was fifteen, and remember most of it quite vividly. Pale Fire would be a more applicable comparison.

[mr.pants]

Superhero comics and pulp comics in general were built on crazy ideas being just thrown out there. What about Kandor? Krypto? Etta Candy? Jimmy Olsen stories? Animal Man? Woolong Island? Everything touched by Kirby? They all started

Superheroes are crazy ass shit and provoking narratives. Just look at them. It's not hard to expect that, especially from a company that continuously brags about Watchmen.

[naswho]

Haha I was going to comment about the bolding too.

I agree and disagree with a lot of Seneca's comments. First and foremost I think his tastes are a bit unrealistic with what DC's going to put out. I'd like to have more "forward thinking idea comics," but it's almost impossible to imagine a DCU where every issue out there is just some creator throwing daring ideas at the wall. They are serial comics by nature. As you guys said, this is what you get with DC and Marvel, where you're reading about franchise-style characters and their stories by definition cannot end.

I STRONGLY disagree with the idea that every comic should be accessible to all readers. Yeah, you can argue about the format, but this is either being stubborn or naive, because I think everyone knows by this point that comics should logically be printed directly as trades. The only reason single issues exist anymore is because companies can make more money having people buy their products twice. To expect someone to understand Batman & Robin 16 would be like expecting someone to come into the last 20 minutes of a 2 hour movie and get what's going on. You're supposed to read the whole series (and really Morrison's whole run) the same way you need to watch that whole movie. To make an even more direct analogy, do you really think someone would understand one of the later issues of Watchmen?

I think Seneca completely overlooks / basically ignores that a big part of the Batman & Robin run were the character arcs with Dick and Damian. Morrison wrote these characters extremely well and developed them (and their relationship) in an immensely satisfying way. Basically the whole point of "Batman and Robin" was what Batman & Robin would be like with a DIFFERENT Batman and Robin, you can't just eliminate character work from a critique of these issues. You guys don't even touch on things like Damian meeting Talia in the Andy Clarke arc and saying "I hope I can be a worthy adversary." Little character moments like that that completely sold B&R as a truly special work.

Where I agree with him is that Return of Bruce Wayne was a failure and the Miagani / Black Glove / Wayne family tree / etc were more of a fizzle than a bang. ROBW only really existed to make sense of Morrison's puzzles and I thought it was boring and really unsatisfying as a basic story. For all of the immense hype and effort Morrison took into developing the mystery of The Black Glove, and then the box, the hyperadapter, etc etc, these ideas feel kind of worthless and pointless in the end. They all really reek of Macguffins (sp?) when they initially seemed like so much more. I think Grant starts with these fantastic ideas (Batman vs. The Devil, Batman shooting Darkseid to bring everything full circle) but he waters them down with so much minutiae that they ultimately become tedious and lose their initial luster.

Also I absolutely believe that Grant originally intended for Hurt to be the Devil and nothing more. If you remember, he was initially supposed to end his Batman run with RIP (and Final Crisis). Batman & Robin didn't get formulated till later. At the end of RIP there was no "Wayne family tree" stuff, no ancestor allusions, it was basically the Devil masquerading as his father. This is supported by the constant satanic references, Grant saying the villain is someone "everyone knows," and Grant even literally writing the line "Did I find the Devil waiting?" at the end of RIP. I think when he was called back on to do the B&R run, he wanted to bring Hurt back but needed a new "hook" or mystery, so he tacked the family ancestry / agent of Darkseid thing on. As I've said before I think it's a lot better if it's just the Devil with no added baggage.

There are certainly flaws to pick with Morrison's run, but if Seneca is really questioning whether the whole thing is worth it, or successful, I think he should pretty much move on from mainstream superhero comics. Morrison's Batman run is so far beyond what most other mainstream superhero comics are doing that I feel almost privileged that it even exists.

I can agree with some of what you're saying here, but I wonder if, by the time Morrison was writing (at least the concluding chapters of) R.I.P., he didn't already know that he was going to be back for "season 2". The Wayne family portraits even show up during R.I.P., using the exact same images as the ones we later see in the "Batman vs Robin". Coincidence? Grant Morrison doesn't believe in it.

For the purposes of reading most Morrison books, it's always important to consider the perception of a moment as separate and distinct from any other moment, while still contributing to the story as a whole. So when something is said to dilute or take away from his run, I don't really understand that idea.

Batman shooting Darkseid is a great moment. Later discovering that Darkseid didn't kill him, but sent him back in time to become a living bomb that will destroy all of space-time. Or learning that Darkseid is Thomas Wayne. None of that stuff dilutes the moment when Batman shot Darkseid, when "Hh" and then died.

Like you, though, I agree that most of the actual debate was spent circling around the station of what superhero comics really are. Every story should be told well, but the reality is that not every story will be. And that's true across all media. Superhero comics are a unique medium where the stories will always move in cycles, never quite reaching any real climactic moment. Wishing that Grant Morrison would come onto a superhero book and completely revolutionize everything we know about superheroes and the way their stories are told is like wishing Christopher Nolan would make a Steven Segal movie that wins an Oscar for Best Actor.