Why do some disagree with the whole "Bruce is the mask" thing?

[jgiannantoni05]

Well put geek1939.

[Fanofthegoblins]

How about they are both aspects of him? Everyone acts differently depending on whom they are around, the situation, etc. The fact that I act differently with friends than I do with family, and that I act even more differently when I'm alone, doesn't make any of those "fake".

Not everyone is the same. Sometimes a guy CAN be fake around his friends and the public.

Take some racists and bigots for example, a man can be nice to you and shake your hand, but behind closed doors, they see you as an abomination to their race. They'll act nice to you in order to keep their jobs, they don't want the town to hate them. When they are wearing hoods, they can move freely and say whatever they want.

Edit - I do agree with the rest of what you said.

[Quinnhop]

Grant Morrison persuaded me with his view on the topic (his view: unity/one/synthesis, no duality, Bruce isn't a mask).

Grant Morrison: “It's a slightly different way of looking at the secret identity dynamic. There was a time when I might have argued that 'Bruce Wayne' died on the night his parents were shot and was replaced by 'Batman' but that approach seems a little naive and needlessly dualistic - Bruce Wayne didn't die that night, he survived and then decided to deal with his feelings of loss, rage and vulnerability in an unusual but highly effective manner. Bruce and Batman are the same person - that's the really interesting thing about this character to me now, the way they reflect and create one another to play different essential roles in this man's outrageous life.”

Grant Morrison: “Bruce Wayne and Batman are inseparable, but in Batman's eyes, Bruce is often a persona or mask that he has to use. I still think that Bruce and Batman are the same guy, but only Batman himself can maybe see that Bruce is a little different – he tries to act differently as Bruce. He imagines this is the person he might have turned out to be, which would have been more light-hearted and a lot more witty. Because that's the guy he is and has always been. So I think it's Batman himself who actually splits the personality, because Bruce and Batman are really the exact same person. Batman carries out the need for Bruce to avenge his parents and put order into the world or whatever. But it's the same guy, and maybe getting him to realize that is the important thing. That's a big step for Batman.”

This.

Batman has achieved nondual/post post-formal operational thinking.

He is fully integrated.

How about they are both aspects of him? Everyone acts differently depending on whom they are around, the situation, etc. The fact that I act differently with friends than I do with family, and that I act even more differently when I'm alone, doesn't make any of those "fake". It's just me, in different scenarios. You're trying to put a person in a box, and it just doesn't work like that.

In the case of Bruce, "Bruce Wayne" didn't die when his parents did. If that were true, why would he even bother holding onto the identity? Why not ditch the facade? Why develop friendships and try to fall in love? Why not be Batman 24/7? Because he's still human. The death of his parents didn't kill all humanity in the guy, which the "Bruce Wayne is dead" approach implies. If it did, he wouldn't care about helping people...because you need empathy for that, and for that, you need Bruce Wayne.

Even outside of that, the "Bruce Wayne is dead" portrayal makes for a less interesting character. He's less complex and ultimately just one-note. And that's NOT a good thing.

This also.

[Ian Pressman]

It also means making him legally insane.

Not necessarily insane. I didn't like a lot of things about Batman beyond, but this video contains hands-down, the best conversation Bruce has ever had about himself.

[stk]

You miss my point.(And the reason there should be no Alfred and Leslie in young Bruce's life.)

lol yeah, right. How does that work? A ten year-old boy raises himself? Raised by wolves? Grew up on the streets? As a hermit on a mountain?

You are absolutely right that you'd need to change the story and take away all human contact from the young Bruce to turn him into the crazy, "I'm not Bruce; I'm Batman" guy. But that's not what happened in ANY version of the story in his entire 73-year history.

Not necessarily insane. I didn't like a lot of things about Batman beyond, but this video contains hands-down, the best conversation Bruce has ever had about himself.

In your opinion. I think it's horrible and degrades him as a human character. That scene also had abnormally poor animation for BB, but that's a side issue.

[carabas]

Sigh... Here we go again.

[stk]

Is that the end of Murderer/Fugitive? I never could make it all the way through that. I guess it's nice that they had Bruce "realize" he was Bruce, but I prefer a version of the character who was never confused about it.

[B. Kuwanger]

People like to be contrary to popular opinion, and both sides of the debate happen to be popular.

Something did die with his parents. The guy people know as Bruce Wayne doesn't exist. His chance to be that guy is gone. The guy people know as Batman is Bruce Wayne. Batman is a mask that he uses.

[Quinnhop]

Is that the end of Murderer/Fugitive? I never could make it all the way through that. I guess it's nice that they had Bruce "realize" he was Bruce, but I prefer a version of the character who was never confused about it.

Amen! 10cc

[stk]

People like to be contrary to popular opinion, and both sides of the debate happen to be popular.

Something did die with his parents. The guy people know as Bruce Wayne doesn't exist. His chance to be that guy is gone.

We've seen just about all possible versions of this up and down the scale at one point or other in the character's history. Who he is, who he isn't.

But the original character as originally created by Finger and Kane was perfectly well-adjusted. He cried as a kid when his folks died, and he made a solemn vow, as kids are wont to do. And he did train himself. But he grew up pretty normal and we don't see him mope or cry again. Being Batman was something he may have taken seriously, but it was something he enjoyed doing. And you get the sense that if he didn't enjoy it, he wouldn't do it. He didn't even go out every night in those early years. He didn't "patrol" or anything like that. He just sat around and conducted his normal life like a normal person, until a case came up that he felt needed his attention. If there wasn't something unusual or interesting about it, he left it to the police. And that's the way things went for quite a while.

In some ways, I feel like that Golden Age Batman is more rounded and believable as a human character than many of the more recent interpretations.

[carabas]

Is that the end of Murderer/Fugitive? I never could make it all the way through that. I guess it's nice that they had Bruce "realize" he was Bruce, but I prefer a version of the character who was never confused about it.

It is, but oddly that issue never made it into the trades. I hope they'll fix this if they do a Knightfall/No Man's Land style reissue at some point.

And well, the entire point of Murderer/Fugitive was getting to a brighter, more positive Batman, undoing a bit of Frank Miller's influence. Which unfortunately lasted all of two months, when Jeph Loeb took over the main book.

[Fanofthegoblins]

Come to think of it, Dick and Afred do refer to him as "Bruce" when he's alone and out of costume. Bats isn't bothered by it. You don't see Afred call him "Batman", just "Master Bruce".

[B. Kuwanger]

Well yeah because that's his identity. His personality is a different story.

In some ways, I feel like that Golden Age Batman is more rounded and believable as a human character than many of the more recent interpretations.

The Bat-Man came off as well rounded, but he also broke necks and toted guns. Even the later, more considerate version by the same creators is, in one way or another, unlike the character as he's been for most of his existence.

I think a lot of later writers were correct in establishing a more clear end point for his believability.

[stk]

And well, the entire point of Murderer/Fugitive was getting to a brighter, more positive Batman, undoing a bit of Frank Miller's influence.

That's ironic, because I guess their thinking was that they had to take the character as low as they could before building him back up. But that low point (fistfight in the Bat-cave and abandoning the Bruce Wayne identity) caused me to instantly drop all the Bat-books without ever finishing their story and see their intent.

The Bat-Man came off as well rounded, but he also broke necks and toted guns.

Which is also more believable in a human character. The original Batman did NOT go around killing criminals, but if they did happen to die in the course of the adventure, Batman didn't really cry about it. "A fitting end for his kind."

And that's believable. His eventual 'no killing' code came about artificially, to stave off potential problems with parents or whatever. We're supposed to believe that an event so traumatic made Bruce angry enough to wage war on all criminals, and that he was SO angry at criminals that he promised never to kill any of them no matter the circumstances? Huh...? Did Zorro kill? Yes. Did the Shadow and the Spider kill? Yes. Lone Ranger? Yes. Vigilantes of the olden days? Yes. Sherlock Holmes and Watson? Sure, not often but it happened. From an in-universe perspective, I'm not sure what possible influence would have inspired young Bruce to take such a soft 'no killing under any circumstances' approach to fighting crime.

[Mr. Holmes]

And that's believable. His eventual 'no killing' code came about artificially, to stave off potential problems with parents or whatever. We're supposed to believe that an event so traumatic made Bruce angry enough to wage war on all criminals, and that he was SO angry at criminals that he promised never to kill any of them no matter the circumstances? Huh...? Did Zorro kill? Yes. Did the Shadow and the Spider kill? Yes. Lone Ranger? Yes. Vigilantes of the olden days? Yes. Sherlock Holmes and Watson? Sure, not often but it happened. From an in-universe perspective, I'm not sure what possible influence would have inspired young Bruce to take such a soft 'no killing under any circumstances' approach to fighting crime.

Yup, that's what I've been saying all along.