What do you think is the absolute worst major Batman event/story?

[ispacehead]

Keeping Barbara in the wheelchair for as long as they did was one of the most creatively and narratively honest decisions that DC made. By corollary, retconning her paralysis was one of the most narratively dishonest decisions they made for the reboot.

Her paralysis was a representation of the fact that there are consequences in the DC Universe, and consequences are things you have to live with. Consequences of your actions and consequences of the actions of others.

I couldn't agree more. It might not be the best comic ever written, (much like Death in the Family) but the consequences of that issue allowed for Barb's transformation into Oracle, which hardly hurt her as a character. She became a much more integral part of the team after the tragedy.

[Haytil]

But there aren't but temporary consequences to anything in the DCU, in the world we're dealing with. In that world, most people get better.

No, in that world, most of the superheroes get better. They never suffer paralysis, disfigurement, or even death. And yes, that is dishonest, which is why the permanence of Barbara's injury was so creatively refreshing to see.

And in this world, the one we're in? I'm off my stick because medicine marches on.

I fail to see your point. Because of one special, anecdotal case, where the state of medical technology and the nature of your injury overlapped, that now suddenly means that ALL permanent, crippling, or disfiguring injuries are now curable?

Until paralysis, as an injury, is eradicated from society, it shouldn't be eradicated from comic book fiction.

A friend of mine went from bedridden in a coma with most of his skin gone to having a new face and a wheelchair to being out of the chair and on a walker or cane with big absurd-looking boots and a load of machinery stuck in place of bone and organ that wasn't working so well anymore.

Does your friend look the same as he did before his injury? Does his face and skin look exactly the same? Is the equipment he uses not visible or cumbersome at all, so much so that you wouldn't know it was there if you didn't say so? Has he completely gained 100% of his physical faculties?

Most importantly, if all the above is true, then does everyone who has suffered as he has also have access to the same miracle cures?

I'd be willing to bet "No" to most, if not all, of the above.

But I guarantee you, when a protagonist in comics suffers the kinds of injuries that would result in paralysis, disfigurement, some form of crippling, or even DEATH, you'll never see it portrayed honestly. Plastic surgery will always make the hero look identical to their pre-accident days - no scars, no disfigurement. They'll get out of wheelchairs and fight crime again, with a physical performance that's better than ever.

And that's dishonest.

The fantastic element, by necessity, changes the rest of the world in which it is taking place, just as introducing a novel device or idea into this world changes how much of it operates. The car changed many cultures when it was introduced, and not just in terms of getting to one place from another faster. Commercial train travel changed English literature forever. Medicine has changed how we eat, work, have sex or investigate crimes. To change these things in fiction or in reality doesn't invalidate anything. To pretend that advancement or fantasy are a waste of time and resources is just sad.

Exactly. But what you don't understand is the difference between those examples and the "Miraculous cure" problem we're discussing.

Take cars as your example (you can substitute anything else you listed, though). Cars absolutely changed everything. And fiction - including comics - incorporate that. You see cars all over the place in comics. It's not only Batman with his Batmobile - each everyday character in a comic has a car, whether that's vital to the story or not.

But not every character has a miraculous cure - so magically curing your protagonist, but then not incorporating that into the rest of your fiction and magically curing EVERYONE in your written universe, is nonsensical. Because what's really going on is that the writer is too lazy to accept the consequences of what's happened to the main character - so they wipe it away, and then ignore the consequences of that wiping away (which should be to then apply the cure to everyone else).

It's a double standard. Either accept the consequences of getting shot and paralyzed, or accept the consequences of a miracle cure existing in your fictional world. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Besides, these are superheroes. If overcoming adversity isn't in them, what are they here for?

Magical cures aren't "overcoming adversity." Learning to accept the frustrating limitations that life has dealt you, and learning to move beyond them and still enjoy a fruitful and productive live DESPITE them, is "overcoming adversity." Barbara's first 20 years as Oracle was "overcoming adversity," and that's why she was a hero worth reading about.

I don't know if you're directing that one at me, but.. I put out an actual, real-life piece of tech that has seen disabled people walk.

I think you're missing the point. Paralysis is still a very real problem for many people, even if some have been lucky to be given the chance to walk again.

Choosing not to give her a miracle cure or make her one of the exceptions (i.e., one of the people whose injuries are now more easily treatable) isn't DC "refusing to acknowledge" advances in medicine. It's them realizing what the point of Barbara's paralysis ended up being, from a narrative point of view.

Barbara represents the idea and gives the message that "one can work AROUND one's injuries and still live an enjoyable life and contribute to society."

If they did what you suggested, that would transform the message into something like "one needs only wait around long enough for medical science to reach the point where you can be cured, then everything will be hunky dory." That's a terrible message to send.

Again, it reeked of double standards that Batman was back on his feet in less than what, two years, and through the very same magical mumbo-jumbo healing touch crap you're so disdainful of, but are apparently happy to accept, and yet she's not allowed a bit of the same.

You won't get any argument from me there. I'm not "happy to accept" Bruce's magical cure, and I'll be the first to castigate Bruce's healing as being a creatively bankrupt storyline decision.

The only thing that makes Barbara's healing worse than Bruce's healing is the fact that DC had actually GOTTEN IT RIGHT for 20 years before they went back and retconned it.

[Namtab]

Voted War Games...

Though it was never really an 'event,' any time Kevin Smith gets to write Batman, it's pure shit.

[RichSummers]

No, in that world, most of the superheroes get better. They never suffer paralysis, disfigurement, or even death. And yes, that is dishonest, which is why the permanence of Barbara's injury was so creatively refreshing to see.

But I guarantee you, when a protagonist in comics suffers the kinds of injuries that would result in paralysis, disfigurement, some form of crippling, or even DEATH, you'll never see it portrayed honestly. Plastic surgery will always make the hero look identical to their pre-accident days - no scars, no disfigurement. They'll get out of wheelchairs and fight crime again, with a physical performance that's better than ever.

And that's dishonest.



Magical cures aren't "overcoming adversity." Learning to accept the frustrating limitations that life has dealt you, and learning to move beyond them and still enjoy a fruitful and productive live DESPITE them, is "overcoming adversity." Barbara's first 20 years as Oracle was "overcoming adversity," and that's why she was a hero worth reading about.



Choosing not to give her a miracle cure or make her one of the exceptions (i.e., one of the people whose injuries are now more easily treatable) isn't DC "refusing to acknowledge" advances in medicine. It's them realizing what the point of Barbara's paralysis ended up being, from a narrative point of view.

Barbara represents the idea and gives the message that "one can work AROUND one's injuries and still live an enjoyable life and contribute to society."

I just wanted to quote this because I believe this is an excellent summary as to why I thought Babs was such a great character as Oracle. Perhaps her injury was not handled properly in TKJ, but the subsequent rise to Oracle, as someone indispensible to the bat family and the DCU showed that those not on the front lines who are not physically fighting are just as, if not more important than the warrior on the front lines. That certainly rings true in real life at times and I loved that being shown in comics. When Bruce was gone, Babs was just as important as Dick was to keeping Gotham from turning to shit.

I'm not averse to her even gaining her ability to walk again, I just hate how it was handled. I would have much prefered to watch Babs gradually heal and eventually regain the use of her legs. That in my mind, would have been a great journey for her character and would have restored her to the "physical perfection" that is so necessary for comics in a way that would have benefited the character in the long term.

[LoneNecromancer]

I'm not averse to her even gaining her ability to walk again, I just hate how it was handled. I would have much prefered to watch Babs gradually heal and eventually regain the use of her legs.

That's not how spinal injuries work. While some do in fact regain some movement depending on the degree of injury, you have to be seeing some improvement over the following months after it. After such a long period with little improvement, yeah, you're not walking again by yourself.

[TheDarkNut]

Really, beside the shooting of Barbara, I think Killing Joke is no where near one of the worst bat stories told.

[RichSummers]

That's not how spinal injuries work. While some do in fact regain some movement depending on the degree of injury, you have to be seeing some improvement over the following months after it. After such a long period with little improvement, yeah, you're not walking again by yourself.

I'm not arguing how spinal injuries work in the real world. Nor am I arguing how they should be reflected in a medium like comics . I'm only arguing that once the decision was made that she would "magically" regain the use of her legs there were better ways for DC to handle it than flashpoint, random healing. If we're going to accept random healing, there were better ways to handle the narrative.

If you want to argue that she should not have regained the use of her legs however, I don't necessarily disagree. I prefered the character as she was but if she was going to be "healed" they were many better ways to go about it.

[whydelongeface]

Voted War Games...

Though it was never really an 'event,' any time Kevin Smith gets to write Batman, it's pure shit.

Kevin Smith didn't write War Games.

[vampiric_cannibal]

Kevin Smith didn't write War Games.

Indeed he did not, but Namtab never said that. The War Games and Kevin Smith phrases were in different paragraphs and unrelated.

[the Eviltoadman]

Not to dredge up any old arguments in my first time here, but I have to wonder how many of you bought TKJ off the racks. In context, none of the sidekicks were getting much love those days. Denny told Marv & George he WAS NOT going to use Dick & they could do whatever they wanted with him.

The clown's game in TKJ wasn't against pointy-ears, it was against Gordon. Not to say if he had broken Jim, the big man wouldn't have crumbled, but still ... Babs' shooting was a move against the Commissioner. And Jim Gordon kicked the clown's ass!

The super-scientific cures for paralysis. Again, Denny was trying to do the Shadow, not Doc Savage. There were no super powers in Gotham. Right or wrong, there was no chance of Babs getting any sort of miracle cure(Shondra Kinsolving aside).

But, this isn't "defend one you think is unfairly attacked", it's worst. I had forgotten how bad Last Laugh and War Crimes were, hated R.I.P., and would go so far as to say anyone who embraces INC. doesn't understand Batman in the least.

[batman23]

Inc is the best Batbook out right now. I understand Batman, but I also understand what Morrison is doing with the character.

[The Man From Room X]

I didnt voted for it because it wasnt on the poll, and I saw some pretty good contenders for the title, but god, Kevin Smith literally pissed all over Year One with his oh-so-clever Batman the Widening Gyre. Man that was a turd if i ever knew one.

[stk]

I didnt voted for it because it wasnt on the poll, and I saw some pretty good contenders for the title, but god, Kevin Smith literally pissed all over Year One with his oh-so-clever Batman the Widening Gyre. Man that was a turd if i ever knew one.

Eh, I kind of liked it for its ambition. And I typically don't like Smith stories at all. He is the epitome of "can't get out of his own way." But I liked Widening Gyre a hell of a lot more than Officer Down and Murderer/Fugitive. Backhanded compliment as that may be.

[Statham]

The clown's game in TKJ wasn't against pointy-ears, it was against Gordon. Not to say if he had broken Jim, the big man wouldn't have crumbled, but still ... Babs' shooting was a move against the Commissioner. And Jim Gordon kicked the clown's ass!

The super-scientific cures for paralysis. Again, Denny was trying to do the Shadow, not Doc Savage. There were no super powers in Gotham. Right or wrong, there was no chance of Babs getting any sort of miracle cure(Shondra Kinsolving aside).

No, the Joker targeted Jim Gordon as well as Barbara to get at Batman. Not just Jim. He's making a point to Batman that anyone can be made to be like him, that all it takes it just one day for the sanest man to snap. Even Batman's closest ally. He does it to Jim knowing Batman will come after him - there's that knowing smirk plastered across his face the very second Batman arrives at the abandoned funfair. And it's telling that Gordon gets no real catharsis from the monstrous act committed against him or his daughter; He gets the macho card of the torture having done nothing to him and that he's fine, but it's Batman that enters into the book's final confrontation, where the Joker basically makes it seem like this was just another game to get at him. Batman beats the tar out of the Joker, and gets the remarkably coherent statement from the Joker where he makes it abundantly clear he knows how the game works, now. Regardless, it's still textbook fridging to a degree - the maiming or killing of a female character to make an impact on a male character. Because Barbara has zero impact in the story beyond her clutching at Batman and crying.

As for the 'no superpowers' in Gotham thing, that was entirely at odds with the rest of the DCU, and even if it was O'Neill's intention to make it a more low-key, urban Batman who was the stuff of legend, once he left the books, there was no excuse. We aren't asking for miracle cures like Batman got, but it was telling that there have been progressions in science that have enabled people with paralysis similar to Barbara's to walk again. In the 90's? Fine, sure, it wasn't happening, but there was no excuse that we reached 2011 and she was still in the chair with the only progress being that she'd moved her toes post-Brainiac. It's not even super-science, these days, it's science fact. There are things out there in the world that can help people with paralysis beyond them being in a chair, but DC made it and her struggle almost tokenistic at times; Again, she didn't even have, say, an actual electronic wheelchair or whatever - except in far-future portrayals like Batman #666. It was ridiculous, and yet DC have just blundered into another misfire by having her be suddenly Batgirl again when fans know she was previously Oracle, and yet there's no real weight, nothing earned from the development. There's nothing satisfactory about her being magically handwaved back into using her legs entirely via some African experimental science mumbojumbo they can't even be bothered to explain fully explain now, which is just as pathetic as if they had magicked her legs back into working in the 90's.

[Officersmile1466]

I haven't read all the books on this list but I believe that if you can remember it, even if you remember it for being terrible, then there's no way it can be the worst bat book. So for me the worst one is one I probably read at some point and now can't remember ever reading.

Oh and I recently read Batman odyssey and while it was terrible it truly is one of those brilliant pieces of art that is so absolutely awful in every regard that it becomes fantastic.