Just what is the appeal of Batman these days?

[Lacuna Caster]

I'm not finding the "fictional Batman" to be at fault, I'm explaining that this disconnect is a problem with the character's ongoing writing and existing premise. As I said previously, comparably rich or smart heroes like Stark and Reed don't have this problem because they are dealing almost exclusively with international or cosmic threats, and leaving the street crime to the B tier heroes. That's a big part of what makes this a batman-specific problem.

Now, hang on a second. I'm agreed that splitting Batman's attention between Darkseid and Roxy Rocket within the same continuity is pretty incongruous. But the conversation seemed to be drifting in the direction of saying that Batman/Bruce Wayne's actions, even considered strictly on a local Gotham-level scale, were excessively brutal or ultimately ineffectual.

Now to be fair, in the past I've waxed rhapsodically about how Batman's villains are, in a certain sense, the product of their environment- that absent the rampant corruption and brutality of the setting, most of them would be, if not exactly decent people, probably less driven over the edge. Does something similar apply to their henchmen? Probably. But whatever the roots of their depravity, Ivy, Two-Face, Penguin and the bulk of their henchmen are dangerous sociopaths that have to be forcibly stopped for the good of others, and before any attempt at reform can be considered. There are no painless methods of doing this. And Batman is only ineffectual in that capacity for the same reason that Zod keeps escaping the Phantom Zone.

(I also think Superman holding down a dayjob at the daily planet or kvetching with jimmy over the watercooler is equally obviously a dereliction of duty on the cosmic scale, yet nobody seems to complain about this.)

[Psyren]

In the long run? Maybe not. But in the short term, what, a couple of thousand lives? That's not nothing, especially if you're the one rescued. He's also one of the few superheroes to canonically actually engage and fund social programs.

The problem is that looking at Gotham, this basically ends up being Informed Attribute. Social programs do not appear to be helping the city at all. And you have to have rampant crime in Gotham, because his rogues' gallery is marketable, and half of them are gangsters with no real powers of their own. A city with no street crime makes placing gangsters difficult.

Stark Richards et al absolutely have this problem, cosmic threats don't prevent them from using their skills/money to benefit the struggling classes. It's just a matter of how far you choose to deconstruct.

As I mentioned, Stark and Richards avoid this problem entirely. Neither of them actually care about street crime. They might save someone getting mugged in the alley they're zipping past on the way to their TED talk or whatever, but that's a pretty rare occurrence for them to be dealing with rather than the day job (or night job in this case.) Again, there are plenty of other heroes of much more modest means to handle that sort of thing.

Now, hang on a second. I'm agreed that splitting Batman's attention between Darkseid and Roxy Rocket within the same continuity is pretty incongruous. But the conversation seemed to be drifting in the direction of saying that Batman/Bruce Wayne's actions, even considered strictly on a local Gotham-level scale, were excessively brutal or ultimately ineffectual.

Now to be fair, in the past I've waxed rhapsodically about how Batman's villains are, in a certain sense, the product of their environment- that absent the rampant corruption and brutality of the setting, most of them would be, if not exactly decent people, probably less driven over the edge. Does something similar apply to their henchmen? Probably. But whatever the roots of their depravity, Ivy, Two-Face, Penguin and the bulk of their henchmen are dangerous sociopaths that have to be forcibly stopped for the good of others, and before any attempt at reform can be considered. There are no painless methods of doing this. And Batman is only ineffectual in that capacity for the same reason that Zod keeps escaping the Phantom Zone.

I agree with that force is unavoidable - the first time you run into the likes of Penguin. After the 4th or 5th time however, thinking about root causes seems to be a necessary and inadequately explored step, because punching the guy doesn't seem to take.

(I also think Superman holding down a dayjob at the daily planet or kvetching with jimmy over the watercooler is equally obviously a dereliction of duty on the cosmic scale, yet nobody seems to complain about this.)

Whenever I see disabled comments, I can't help but wonder what kind of fecal fulmination broke out to drive them to that

Jocularity aside, Superman's villains tend to be pretty... well, super. They're not just gangsters and henchmen with mental disorders. Not much you can do to make the likes of Zod, Mxyzptlk, Bizarro or Braniac meaningfully reform. Hell, his one truly muggle villain (Lex) has more than enough money to avoid any kind of justice in the court system with ease, and he might not even be all that crazy with his Superman hate in the first place.

[Tvtyrant]

My personal headcanon is that Gotham is haunted. The thing that haunts it corrupts the people who live there, and it is most centered at Arkham.

The Ghost of Gotham is obsessed with repetition, resetting things and forcing them to happen again and again. Bruce Wayne, the Joker and others have died multiple times and been brought back to replay the ghosts' dream. Villains escape from impregnable fortresses, new Robins appear, Alred never passes away, all because the ghost is replaying its trauma again and again.

[deuterio12]

My personal headcanon is that Gotham is haunted. The thing that haunts it corrupts the people who live there, and it is most centered at Arkham.

The Ghost of Gotham is obsessed with repetition, resetting things and forcing them to happen again and again. Bruce Wayne, the Joker and others have died multiple times and been brought back to replay the ghosts' dream. Villains escape from impregnable fortresses, new Robins appear, Alred never passes away, all because the ghost is replaying its trauma again and again.

That reminds me of an headcannon I saw years ago about how the Joker died long ago and the body was dumped in a trash compactor so his death didn't become public, but then somebody else in the city snapped and decided to start dressing themselves as a clown to commit crimes and the cycle has been repeating over and over so yeah maybe the city is haunted and "Joker" is a ghost that keeps finding new hosts.

There's even an official comic where they use that theory to cover Bruce's secret identity, claiming that no sane man could survive as Batman for that long and there's actually been a lot of different people under the hood.

And heck wasn't there the whole saga where Bruce was out of commission and so he found a replacement to don the suit?

The robin train is a pretty good example of why Bats not very good in the head. Why else is he dragging kids in bright colors to his crime fighting sessions?

[Legato Endless]

The robin train is a pretty good example of why Bats not very good in the head. Why else is he dragging kids in bright colors to his crime fighting sessions?

I mean, that's more an argument about the sanity of adults in escapist fiction in general. A lot of heroes, some generally intended to be exceedingly morally sensible people, take kids into combat with them. Or they initially object and the narrative disabuses them of their petty notions against it. Bats is just the most blatant example to survive the kid sidekick trope falling somewhat out of fashion.

[Psyren]

I mean, that's more an argument about the sanity of adults in escapist fiction in general. A lot of heroes, some generally intended to be exceedingly morally sensible people, take kids into combat with them. Or they initially object and the narrative disabuses them of their petty notions against it. Bats is just the most blatant example to survive the kid sidekick trope falling somewhat out of fashion.

I mean, DC can fix that too if they really want to. Marvel beat them to the punch here also - Bucky used to be Cap's Kid Sidekick, and across reboots and continuities they've been steadily aging him up - until we arrived at the MCU iteration, where he became actually older than the titular character, and a tortured heartthrob antihero besides.

[deuterio12]

I mean, that's more an argument about the sanity of adults in escapist fiction in general. A lot of heroes, some generally intended to be exceedingly morally sensible people, take kids into combat with them. Or they initially object and the narrative disabuses them of their petty notions against it. Bats is just the most blatant example to survive the kid sidekick trope falling somewhat out of fashion.

You'll notice that basically every example on that page a) has better reasons for having a kid sidekick (lke Lone Wolf brings his cub along because there's a conspiracy to fully wipe out his family that framed them as "kill on sight" criminals and the kid wouldn't be safe anywhere else) and b) non-bat protagonists don't get said kid sidekicks killed only to get a new kid sidekick and get them killed too.

At this point you literally have better survival odds being Joker's minion than being Batman's minion!

[Dienekes]

You'll notice that basically every example on that page a) has better reasons for having a kid sidekick (lke Lone Wolf brings his cub along because there's a conspiracy to fully wipe out his family that framed them as "kill on sight" criminals and the kid wouldn't be safe anywhere else) and b) non-bat protagonists don't get said kid sidekicks killed only to get a new kid sidekick and get them killed too.

At this point you literally have better survival odds being Joker's minion than being Batman's minion!

Eh, Bat-comics themselves did have a string of reasons for the side-kicks. At least the good comics. ASBAR did basically kidnap Grayson and tortured him. But that's ASBAR... ASBAR sucks.

Most modern versions of Grayson era Robin was that Bruce adopted him as a ward with no intention of turning him into a Robin. Only for Grayson going off and trying to get his parent's killers and uncovering the Bat cave. So Bruce decided to train him and take him under his wing so he wouldn't get himself killed.

Then Grayson went off on his own to become Nightwing, and was replaced with Jason Todd.

Now, original Todd was just Grayson 2.0. He was terrible, but that isn't really the modern version of the character. It was also well before the backlash against teen sidekicks. Modern retelling is that Bruce found Todd trying to steal the Batmobile, then enrolled him in a school for troubled youths instead of making him a sidekick. Then Grayson left, and Todd started fighting criminals to get Batman's attention again. He was made Robin again to keep him from getting himself killed.

Todd dies, next up Tim Drake. Bruce does not replace Todd after he dies, because he realizes the problem with sidekicks. But he starts going a little too harsh with his dealing of criminals. Not orphan super genius detective child Tim figures out who Bruce is, and takes up the mantle of Robin himself to act as a calming influence on Bruce. At least originally. Now the continuities are weird and he became Red Robin... or something.

Tim goes off to lead the Young Justice, and position of Robin is open again.

Enter Stephanie Brown. Drake's girlfriend and daughter of a criminal who just sort of becomes Robin. But because she's an idiot, Bruce fires her. She then becomes Spoiler and starts a gang war and gets herself killed. Then in a complete ass pull we find out she didn't really die. But in any case, her story was kinda bad. And in the modern continuity she was never Robin and is just doing her Spoiler shtick without Batman's approval.

Which leads us to Damian Wayne. Bruce's son via mind-control rape with Talia al Ghul. And no one can control this kid. He's basically Bruce but tiny. He's also not Bruce's Robin, at least not originally. He's Grayson's. He sort of gets away with being a child crime fighter because he was raised to be an assassin anyway, and it's not like the criminal element of Gotham is any worse than the greatest assassins in the world gunning for you. Anyway, he dies by his adult clone. And gets resurrected by a magic rock anyway.

There are no Batgirl deaths, though Barbara Gordon does become crippled while out of costume by pure misfortune of being related to Jim Gordon.

So from this we do actually see modern Batman mostly has been trying to make reasons for these characters, and why Bruce lets them wander around the city and fight crime. They've also mostly been age'd up. Except for Damian Wayne. But, he was made by Grant Morrison. Who's whole shtick is basically bringing back old people and concepts that probably should be forgotten. Occasionally he makes them cool, often he doesn't.

[deuterio12]

He was made Robin again to keep him from getting himself killed.

Todd dies

So bats doesn't know that people die when they're killed?

Which leads us to Damian Wayne. Bruce's son via mind-control rape with Talia al Ghul. And no one can control this kid. He's basically Bruce but tiny.

So bats the supposed super genius detective doesn't even know how to handle a spoiled kid. Clearly that makes him extra qualified to know how to handle Gotham's crime.

He's also not Bruce's Robin, at least not originally. He's Grayson's.

Thanks to Bruce providing a shining example that the best way to fight crime is to bring along angry kids in bright colors.

He sort of gets away with being a child crime fighter because he was raised to be an assassin anyway, and it's not like the criminal element of Gotham is any worse than the greatest assassins in the world gunning for you. Anyway, he dies by his adult clone. And gets resurrected by a magic rock anyway.

"It's fine if I get my kid sidekicks killed because I can just use magic to ressurect them!

Except Todd and Stephanie brown, they can burn in hell for all I care."

Not to mention all the better people that die in the DC universe, do you see Bats lifting a finger to go get magic rocks for them? No, only his trueblood descendant gets the benefit.

There are no Batgirl deaths, though Barbara Gordon does become crippled while out of costume by pure misfortune of being related to Jim Gordon.

And so Bats shows his generosity to Barbara by letting her remain a cripple while he already used his resources to recover from a broken spine himself at least twice.

That's how Bruce treats the people willing to die and bleed/die for him. Let them rot in a grave or wheelchair if they run out of luck. Only for Damian does Bruce makes an effort to fix things, and that's certainly because he's Bruce's biological son and as you pointed out quite similar to each other, so he feels pride for the little psychopath.

So from this we do actually see modern Batman mostly has been trying to make reasons for these characters, and why Bruce lets them wander around the city and fight crime.

"The kid/teen keeps trying to get into violent situations, so I'll keep him safe by dragging him into violent situations DRESSED IN BRIGHT COLORS" is the kind of logic one would expect from the Joker.

[Dienekes]

Sincere question here. Do you even read comics or are you just saying things at this point?

Alright, Bruce did try to fix Barbara that was a whole series trying to help her when she first became crippled. She originally just had a worse injury than Bruce did and could not be helped. Only now in comics they did find a solution. Barbara is back as Batgirl. So that complaint is out of the way.

Bruce thought Stephanie was literally blown up. Not much to do at that point. Also she turned out not even to be dead. You want him to resurrect an alive person?

With Jason he did mourn as a father would. And he wasn’t the one that resurrected Damian. That was Ra’s plus another villain who were trying to use Damian for their own purpose.

And no one can control Damian. He’s a wunderkind whose about as smart and skilled as Bruce. The little bastard has outwitted Lex Luther and Ra’s.

You are totally right about the color pallet. But perfectly honest as a design I prefer it to everyone running around in blacks and grays.

[Sapphire Guard]

I'm still not seeing how none of this applies to every other comic book hero. What makes General Zod so impossible to deal with, the technology exists to contain and rehabilitate him? Lex has been caught for enough corrupt things to put him away for good.

Doomsday probably should be captured and contained, because that way he doesn't come back more powerful.

Stark, Richards, et al could put his money/talents into social initiatives rather than bigger guns.

[deuterio12]

Sincere question here. Do you even read comics or are you just saying things at this point?

I'll admit that I don't read everything, in particular the most recent stuff, but still more than enough to see patterns.

Alright, Bruce did try to fix Barbara that was a whole series trying to help her when she first became crippled. She originally just had a worse injury than Bruce did and could not be helped. Only now in comics they did find a solution. Barbara is back as Batgirl. So that complaint is out of the way.

Case in point, nice to see Bruce remembered to throw her a bone after all those years she spent crippled.

Bruce thought Stephanie was literally blown up. Not much to do at that point. Also she turned out not even to be dead. You want him to resurrect an alive person?

Soooo, super detective Batman can't even tell if somebody's actually alive or dead? She wasn't caught in a nuclear blast, there would've been something leftover for identification. And if there wasn't, that much more reason to be paranoid.

With Jason he did mourn as a father would. And he wasn’t the one that resurrected Damian. That was Ra’s plus another villain who were trying to use Damian for their own purpose.

Yeah there's always some villains involved, but Bats was also there and participating.

And no one can control Damian. He’s a wunderkind whose about as smart and skilled as Bruce. The little bastard has outwitted Lex Luther and Ra’s.

And got killed for his troubles. So he isn't that smart, and super genius detective Bruce of all people should figure out a way to reign him down.

You are totally right about the color pallet. But perfectly honest as a design I prefer it to everyone running around in blacks and grays.

Well yeah but it reall brings down Bats whole "MAKE THE CRIMINALS FEAR ME" and "I'M ONE WITH THE NIGHT!". It may even look that Bats is using them as distraction bait "attack the one in bright colors first!". Which considering how they drop like flies...

I'm still not seeing how none of this applies to every other comic book hero. What makes General Zod so impossible to deal with, the technology exists to contain and rehabilitate him? Lex has been caught for enough corrupt things to put him away for good.

Doomsday probably should be captured and contained, because that way he doesn't come back more powerful.

Stark, Richards, et al could put his money/talents into social initiatives rather than bigger guns.

General Zod and Doomsday both have their first appearances by escaping their containment cells built by much more advanced civilizations, plus they both being godlike beings that can and will tear apart pretty much anything on their way. In particular Zod since his superpower is being kryptonian, and normal supes gives us plenty of examples about how kryptonians are the most op thing in DCverse.

Lex's whole sthick is that he's really good at covering/cleaning his tracks, has an army of lawyers and is a plain godlike liar. There was actually a comic where Wonder Woman just uses her truth lasso on Lex during a court session and Lex still wins that (because he made a deal with the devil to be able to lie even over magic). It also helps that Lex lives in a world where "an alien/clone/doppelganger was impersonating me!" is actually a valid excuse, and Lex isn't afraid to use it.

Comic Stark does put his money/talent into social initiatives now and then (there's even a comic where he sells a bunch of his old armors to NATO for fighting "normal" terrorrists with no super powers, then of course the "normal" terrorrists get their hands on vibranium bullets that punch right through that, at least Stark made an effort). Also Stark's actually a drunk arrogant playboy, and has his main armors in bright gold and red while his sidekicks like War Machine get the 50 shadows of grey color scheme so Stark is the one standing out more and being targeted first. Even then Iron Man does an effort of following the law and being open by making public speeches and presenting himself as a Stark worker instead.

Richard actually stops world/dimension threats all the time instead of wasting his talents on the city's thugs. And he sometimes even does it with no need of violence, like one of his early adventures where he just bluffs a group of Skrulls with a bunch of monster films that make the invading aliens believe Earth is super dangerous and thus not worth conquering.

[Lacuna Caster]

The problem is that looking at Gotham, this basically ends up being Informed Attribute. Social programs do not appear to be helping the city at all. And you have to have rampant crime in Gotham, because his rogues' gallery is marketable, and half of them are gangsters with no real powers of their own. A city with no street crime makes placing gangsters difficult...

...I agree with that force is unavoidable - the first time you run into the likes of Penguin. After the 4th or 5th time however, thinking about root causes seems to be a necessary and inadequately explored step, because punching the guy doesn't seem to take.

I broadly agree that I would very much like to see more stories where Wayne Enterprises' efforts at combating systemic poverty were the primary focus, or at least given equal screentime and some measure of discernible success (again, see War on Crime.) But this idea that faux-continuity is a particular problem with Batman's approach to crime-fighting is completely incoherent.

Go ahead and medicate the Joker, or give Two-Face reconstructive surgery, or rebuild the Tricorne Docks, or go into a time loop and fish out Thomas and Martha. 20 issues later there'll be a nervous breakdown or a hostage situation or a localised earthquake or a temporal paradox, and we'll be back to status quo- I'm pretty sure it's happened several times. You can equally argue that Batman makes social philanthropy and rehab look pointless, rather than brute-force deterrence policies, but nobody is arguing the former for some reason.

Jocularity aside, Superman's villains tend to be pretty... well, super. They're not just gangsters and henchmen with mental disorders. Not much you can do to make the likes of Zod, Mxyzptlk, Bizarro or Brainiac meaningfully reform.

Now, hang on a second. I'll admit that Superman's power level and technical proficiency oscillates wildly depending on the period and continuity, and certainly his villains are beyond the power of most mortals to confine. But Superman also has access to fabulously advanced kryptonian technology, has friendly contacts with the Justice League and Lantern Corps, and knows a least a couple of powerful telepaths. Even if work-for-release wasn't a realistic option, it's absurd to blame Batman for convicts escaping Arkham but not Superman for Doomsday's rampages.

Incidentally, if you ever read Dark Night, there's a panel where Dini talks about how the writers considered having Batman just brick up the Joker within a hermetic cell inside the Batcave, as a final resort after he kept escaping from Arkham. But they discarded the idea as being 'too dark, even for him'.

One should bear in mind that this is equivalent to what Superman does with most of his villains.

[Psyren]

But this idea that faux-continuity is a particular problem with Batman's approach to crime-fighting is completely incoherent.

It's less an issue with Batman himself and more to do with the disconnect between his resources and his villains. Back when he was just old-money-kinda-rich, a bunch of gangsters robbing banks and doing street crimes would be a credible threat. But DC buffing Wayne Enterprises to rival LexCorp or Stark levels of global capital while still having the likes of Two-Face and Penguin - and yes, even Joker - be credible threats is just incongruous and rings hollow.

Compare to Tony and Reed - their most well-known villains (e.g. Mandarin and Doom) basically own entire city-states, and that's before you get to the straight-up magical powers they possess. Nobody in Batman's rogues gallery even comes close, not even Ras. With foes like that always lurking in the background, Tony and Reed have an excuse to (a) constantly innovate and (b) leave the lower level crimes to be handled by B-List folks. Batman, to put it bluntly, should have graduated from the likes of Two-Face long ago.

Now, hang on a second. I'll admit that Superman's power level and technical proficiency oscillates wildly depending on the period and continuity, and certainly his villains are beyond the power of most mortals to confine. But Superman also has access to fabulously advanced kryptonian technology, has friendly contacts with the Justice League and Lantern Corps, and knows a least a couple of powerful telepaths. Even if work-for-release wasn't a realistic option, it's absurd to blame Batman for convicts escaping Arkham but not Superman for Doomsday's rampages.

The problem is that Zod vs. Phantom Zone or Doomsday vs... I don't even know what you'd use to imprison him, is an unstoppable force vs. immovable object situation. You can handwave any number of reasons why the Phantom Zone would work to hold Zod right up until it doesn't. The tools needed to lock up an unpowered gangster however are pretty well-defined, and going back to the core problem (i.e. Bruce's obscene wealth), he should be have no trouble affording all of them. And that's before we get into wondering where all the henchmen are coming from every time and why they see henching as a lucrative and beneficial option in the first place.

[deuterio12]

give Two-Face reconstructive surgery

Actually they already done that one, and he seemed to be sane for some time but then went crazy again. Seems like the scar was just an excuse and the psycopath was inside all along.

It's less an issue with Batman himself and more to do with the disconnect between his resources and his villains. Back when he was just old-money-kinda-rich, a bunch of gangsters robbing banks and doing street crimes would be a credible threat. But DC buffing Wayne Enterprises to rival LexCorp or Stark levels of global capital while still having the likes of Two-Face and Penguin - and yes, even Joker - be credible threats is just incongruous and rings hollow.

Compare to Tony and Reed - their most well-known villains (e.g. Mandarin and Doom) basically own entire city-states, and that's before you get to the straight-up magical powers they possess. Nobody in Batman's rogues gallery even comes close, not even Ras. With foes like that always lurking in the background, Tony and Reed have an excuse to (a) constantly innovate and (b) leave the lower level crimes to be handled by B-List folks. Batman, to put it bluntly, should have graduated from the likes of Two-Face long ago.

Indeed, very well put.

The problem is that Zod vs. Phantom Zone or Doomsday vs... I don't even know what you'd use to imprison him, is an unstoppable force vs. immovable object situation. You can handwave any number of reasons why the Phantom Zone would work to hold Zod right up until it doesn't. The tools needed to lock up an unpowered gangster however are pretty well-defined, and going back to the core problem (i.e. Bruce's obscene wealth), he should be have no trouble affording all of them. And that's before we get into wondering where all the henchmen are coming from every time and why they see henching as a lucrative and beneficial option in the first place.

Plus remember that Bats also has access to the Justice League. If Bruce can't call in a favor from his super friends to upgrade the Arkham Asylum so it can hold non-powered humans, I don't see how anybody could help supes build a prison able to properly hold Zod or Doomsday.

[Lacuna Caster]

Actually they already done that one, and he seemed to be sane for some time but then went crazy again. Seems like the scar was just an excuse and the psychopath was inside all along.

They've done all of the things I mentioned, probably on more than one occasion. That's my point. Being constructive and empathic within a faux-continuity is ultimately just as futile as being vengeful and brooding, because superheroes are not allowed to permanently modify the status quo. Is this, perhaps, a weakness of the genre? Sure. But is it a problem specific to Batman? Hell no.

Plus remember that Bats also has access to the Justice League. If Bruce can't call in a favor from his super friends to upgrade the Arkham Asylum so it can hold non-powered humans, I don't see how anybody could help supes build a prison able to properly hold Zod or Doomsday.

Technically speaking, if a guy in a bat-costume can contribute materially to defeating Darkseid, it stands to reason that Clayface or Poison Ivy could figure a way past hyper-augmented security systems. Is the former any more plausible than the latter? Maybe not, but that's how it's set up.

There is also something of a tradeoff between security concerns and rehab efforts, insofar as bricking up Gotham's rogues within solitary confinement would probably make escape virtually impossible in many cases, but would also be considered cruel and inhumane. Things like visitation rights, vocational training and counselling sessions have not-infrequently been avenues of escape for the likes of the Joker.

It's less an issue with Batman himself and more to do with the disconnect between his resources and his villains. Back when he was just old-money-kinda-rich, a bunch of gangsters robbing banks and doing street crimes would be a credible threat. But DC buffing Wayne Enterprises to rival LexCorp or Stark levels of global capital while still having the likes of Two-Face and Penguin - and yes, even Joker - be credible threats is just incongruous and rings hollow...

Again, I'm agreed that having Batman oscillate between God-tier and Street-tier within the same continuity is distinctly incongruous. Clearly, if he's rubbing shoulders with the Justice League, a lot of these factors change. (Starting with how Batman would not exist because Superman could have cleaned up Gotham City's street crime virtually overnight, thereby leaving Bruce to focus on his corporate philanthropy and possibly buying out LexCorp. Yet nobody blames Superman for his apparent disinterest in crimes that don't directly impact his Smallville-Metropolis commute arrangements and desire to go slumming with Perry and Lois.)

[deuterio12]

They've done all of the things I mentioned, probably on more than one occasion. That's my point. Being constructive and empathic within a faux-continuity is ultimately just as futile as being vengeful and brooding, because superheroes are not allowed to permanently modify the status quo. Is this, perhaps, a weakness of the genre? Sure. But is it a problem specific to Batman? Hell no.

There's a difference between being unable to redeem somebody and just keeping them locked in place.

Technically speaking, if a guy in a bat-costume can contribute materially to defeating Darkseid, it stands to reason that Clayface or Poison Ivy could figure a way past hyper-augmented security systems. Is the former any more plausible than the latter? Maybe not, but that's how it's set up.

One super capable genius is acceptable, but every crazy costumed dude in Gotham also being on Batman's level is really stretching things.

In particular when Bats is supposed to be smarter than any of them if not smarter than all them put together. If Bats can predict the Joker's moves and capture the crazy clown alive and with no significant injuries hundreds of times, why can't he design a prison able to contain him?

There is also something of a tradeoff between security concerns and rehab efforts, insofar as bricking up Gotham's rogues within solitary confinement would probably make escape virtually impossible in many cases, but would also be considered cruel and inhumane. Things like visitation rights, vocational training and counselling sessions have not-infrequently been avenues of escape for the likes of the Joker.

True, but after the Joker gassed his 12th orphanage, I don't think anybody in the world would complain about just chaining him up inside some deep cell and welding the door shut with a small opening for food.

It's important to recognize a lost cause and when to stop throwing good money after bad, and considering that indeed the Joker has been known to turn phd psychiatrists into more crazy villains, there's no sanity in trying to "heal" him up anymore.

Again, I'm agreed that having Batman oscillate between God-tier and Street-tier within the same continuity is distinctly incongruous. Clearly, if he's rubbing shoulders with the Justice League, a lot of these factors change. (Starting with how Batman would not exist because Superman could have cleaned up Gotham City's street crime virtually overnight, thereby leaving Bruce to focus on his corporate philanthropy and possibly buying out LexCorp.

Supes did spend at least one night of crime-fighting in Gotham. Something lots of lead something so he had trouble going around.

This has some funny implications I notice now:
-Bruce doesn't use his fortune to modernize the city.
-Lead is toxic and can cause insanity over long exposures. No wonder Gotham city is crazy town, most of the population is stuck breathing and drinking lead!

Yet nobody blames Superman for his apparent disinterest in crimes that don't directly impact his Smallville-Metropolis commute arrangements and desire to go slumming with Perry and Lois.)

Yeah but supes doesn't try to be a brooding edgelord. His parents are also dead, along 99,99% of his species, but he's a cheerful guy, actually keeps his turf Metropolis a pretty nice town most of the time and doesn't get Perry/Lois killed only to replace them with somebody else multiple times. Even Lex Luthor isn't that bad of a guy as long as you don't get directly in the path of his schemes, the man donates a LOT to charity while employing probably thousands of people with honest jobs.

[Lacuna Caster]

In particular when Bats is supposed to be smarter than any of them if not smarter than all them put together. If Bats can predict the Joker's moves and capture the crazy clown alive and with no significant injuries hundreds of times, why can't he design a prison able to contain him?

True, but after the Joker gassed his 12th orphanage, I don't think anybody in the world would complain about just chaining him up inside some deep cell and welding the door shut with a small opening for food.

They wouldn't. In reality, they would absolutely impose the death penalty, and probably tell any officers and/or SWAT teams on his case to just shoot on sight.

But you're not hearing me: Go ahead and kill the Joker. Put his body in a blender, cremate the paste, stick the ashes in a casket and fly it into the sun. He will- somehow- be back in action 20 issues later because that is just how the comics industry rolls. Batman is never going to die in action or age past thirty, and the Joker is never going to be permanently out of action. Just like every other major supervillain.

This has some funny implications I notice now:
-Bruce doesn't use his fortune to modernize the city.

Yes he does. This is at least the third time I've mentioned it in this thread, but Wayne Enterprises canonically spends vast sums on providing public employment and other forms of civic philanthropy. It's not a centerpiece in as many stories as it could or should be, but it's not not a thing.

Yeah but supes doesn't try to be a brooding edgelord...

And Batman doesn't pretend to be a morally perfect platonic ideal of heroism. For the record, I fully agree that dragging under-18s into combat situations against villains with guns is completely reprehensible, but (A) modern versions of the Dark Knight technically don't do that, and (B) Superman will never run into this problem, because Metropolis has virtually no crime, because he is Superman. He can hear a pin drop from 20 miles away, identify the manufacturers' serial number from the sound it makes, be there at hypersonic speed, see thugs hiding behind walls, and freeze them in place without taking a scratch from knives or bullets. Of course his city is going to be squeaky-clean by comparison, but it's not because Batman's methods are inefficient. It's because Batman is drastically weaker than Superman.

I consider it ridiculous to assert that Batman could stand up to Mongul or Bizarro in a fist-fight, but I'm also not going to pretend that any member of Batman's rogues' gallery is going to present a special problem to Big Blue. Which immediately raises the question of why Supes doesn't allocate a little spare time to cleaning up adjacent urban areas. People are perfectly happy to accuse Batman of being a brutalising sadist who kills off child-soldiers, but nobody talks about the 7.29 ongoing rapes that Superman must be statistically ignoring every time he vacations on the family farm.

[Psyren]

Technically speaking, if a guy in a bat-costume can contribute materially to defeating Darkseid, it stands to reason that Clayface or Poison Ivy could figure a way past hyper-augmented security systems. Is the former any more plausible than the latter? Maybe not, but that's how it's set up.

Sure those two probably could, they have actual powers! The likes of Two-Face, Penguin, Black Mask, Harley and Joker don't, yet they don't seem to be able to keep locked up or incapacitated either.

There is also something of a tradeoff between security concerns and rehab efforts, insofar as bricking up Gotham's rogues within solitary confinement would probably make escape virtually impossible in many cases, but would also be considered cruel and inhumane. Things like visitation rights, vocational training and counselling sessions have not-infrequently been avenues of escape for the likes of the Joker.

What Deuterio said.

Again, I'm agreed that having Batman oscillate between God-tier and Street-tier within the same continuity is distinctly incongruous. Clearly, if he's rubbing shoulders with the Justice League, a lot of these factors change. (Starting with how Batman would not exist because Superman could have cleaned up Gotham City's street crime virtually overnight, thereby leaving Bruce to focus on his corporate philanthropy and possibly buying out LexCorp. Yet nobody blames Superman for his apparent disinterest in crimes that don't directly impact his Smallville-Metropolis commute arrangements and desire to go slumming with Perry and Lois.)

Hasn't the longstanding excuse for that been that Batman doesn't want Supes/the League interfering in Gotham? I mean, it's a crappy excuse, but it's what they came up with.

But as I said upthread this points to a larger weakness with DC itself. When your more iconic heroes are literal gods walking around on Earth or policing the galaxy with near limitless power, you have to contrive excuses for them to stay within the defined borders of their respective rogues' galleries. As you yourself noted, Superman could clean up Gotham in no time, so they can never actually let him do that. But they've also established Superman to not just be a god, but a benevolent boyscout god, and now we're wondering why he wouldn't just ignore Batman's wishes and intervene anyway when innocent people are clearly getting hurt. Batman prevents any serious breakdown of social order, but he isn't stopping people from being maimed, brutalized or killed.

When you look at Marvel meanwhile, the few well-known gods they do have (e.g. Thor and Strange) generally have much bigger fish to fry. Because they aren't actually gods at all, they're just dudes* trying to do good, and in general, not nearly as powerful as DC heroes. Marvel has FISS heroes, but nobody who can keep up with Superman; Marvel has speedsters, but nobody who embodies Speed itself; Marvel has strong magic-users, but nobody who was practicing magic since the universe was founded. That kind of thing. So I agree, it's not limited to Batman at all.

[Sapphire Guard]

True, but after the Joker gassed his 12th orphanage, I don't think anybody in the world would complain about just chaining him up inside some deep cell and welding the door shut with a small opening for food.

When has the Joker ever successfully gassed a single orphanage? Panel and page, please. Any time he racks up a serious kill count, he tends to get killed shortly after.

Kryptonians can be contained, we see it all the time. After the fourth or fifth time Zod escapes, doing more damage in a single night than most Bat rogues put together, why doesn't Superman put some effort into either properly containing or rehabilitating him? Especially as unlike Batman,he's actually directly in charge of the containment rather than handing it over to some other authority. So every escape is directly his fault.

Mandarin and Doom can still have things done about them, things like sabotaging Latveria's industry so they don't build superweapons or taking the Mandarin's rings. And none of that prevents them from doing anything like social initiatives. It's to Batman's credit that he doesn't lose sight of street level tragedies, not a fault. There's nothing prevent Stark et al from doing the same except choosing not to care. And they have other villains that are far more stoppable and yet never seem to end their threat permanently.

Lex has been to prison more than once, he's not untouchable or uncontainable.

The only way this works is by blaming the Batman for both being infallible and being imperfect in the same breath.

The problem is that looking at Gotham, this basically ends up being Informed Attribute. Social programs do not appear to be helping the city at all. And you have to have rampant crime in Gotham, because his rogues' gallery is marketable, and half of them are gangsters with no real powers of their own. A city with no street crime makes placing gangsters difficult.

No different from every other continuity. How many Marvel superheroes operate out of New York, without actually putting a dent in the number of supervillain attacks in the city? The Punisher has been killing criminals since the 70s, but there's always someone new to kill, he doesn't make any lasting change.

[Psyren]

No different from every other continuity. How many Marvel superheroes operate out of New York, without actually putting a dent in the number of supervillain attacks in the city? The Punisher has been killing criminals since the 70s, but there's always someone new to kill, he doesn't make any lasting change.

Punisher is neither a multi-billionaire nor a polymath ultra-genius though. He shoots bad guys in the face because that's what he's good at, without any pretensions as to it being particularly effective in the long run or being interested in a better way. He also hasn't claimed sole or primary hero jurisdiction over any specific city or other geographical area. So there isn't really any disconnect there.

In Batman's case, the disconnect is between his methods, his rogues, his motivations, his resources, and his supposed intelligence. No other mainstream hero has the specific combination of those five things he does that creates a similar disconnect. That's what leads to threads and other hot-takes like this one.

[Sapphire Guard]

There are two main criticisms of Batman in this regard.

1) That he fails to put down his villains permanently, and therefore allows further rampages.

Counterexample: Punisher kills plenty of people, but doesn't ever run out of people to kill or improve New York.

2) That he doesn't do social initiatives (untrue) or is beating people up at the expense of the underlying issues, and that this is a specific Batman problem.

Counterexample: Marvel New York, with dozens of superhero residents, including multiple billionaires, tech geniuses, etc, are unable between all of them to enact long term change or quell the constant supervillain attacks, but are not called on this. Meanwhile, because Batman by himself with no superpowers cannot fix one city, he is constantly called on it.

This isn't Marvel bashing, by the way, I read and enjoy both sets of stories, but there's nothing specific to Batman that makes him more worthy of being called out on these things than anyone else.

[Psyren]

Sapphire, I've addressed all your points already. All you're doing now is repeating them.

There are two main criticisms of Batman in this regard.

1) That he fails to put down his villains permanently, and therefore allows further rampages.

Counterexample: Punisher kills plenty of people, but doesn't ever run out of people to kill or improve New York.

Already pointed out that Punisher has neither Batman's money, smarts, morality, money, connections, nor money. Did I mention money?

2) That he doesn't do social initiatives (untrue) or is beating people up at the expense of the underlying issues, and that this is a specific Batman problem.

Counterexample: Marvel New York, with dozens of superhero residents, including multiple billionaires, tech geniuses, etc, are unable between all of them to enact long term change or quell the constant supervillain attacks, but are not called on this. Meanwhile, because Batman by himself with no superpowers cannot fix one city, he is constantly called on it.

None of the billionaires who live in Marvel New York are trying to protect Marvel New York exclusively. They all have global and cosmic threats to deal with. Batman's rogues, even big players like Joker, are decisively local problems - and that's before you get to their relative lack of powers that should make incarceration not insurmountable.

This isn't Marvel bashing, by the way, I read and enjoy both sets of stories, but there's nothing specific to Batman that makes him more worthy of being called out on these things than anyone else.

I already spelled out the 5 things causing his disconnect that no other hero has.

"In Batman's case, the disconnect is between his methods, his rogues, his motivations, his resources, and his supposed intelligence. No other mainstream hero has the specific combination of those five things he does that creates a similar disconnect. That's what leads to threads and other hot-takes like this one."

[deuterio12]

They wouldn't. In reality, they would absolutely impose the death penalty, and probably tell any officers and/or SWAT teams on his case to just shoot on sight.

But you're not hearing me: Go ahead and kill the Joker. Put his body in a blender, cremate the paste, stick the ashes in a casket and fly it into the sun. He will- somehow- be back in action 20 issues later because that is just how the comics industry rolls. Batman is never going to die in action or age past thirty, and the Joker is never going to be permanently out of action. Just like every other major supervillain.

Then give the Joker supernatural powers and/or a powerful backing up organization like every other major supervillain.

Yes he does. This is at least the third time I've mentioned it in this thread, but Wayne Enterprises canonically spends vast sums on providing public employment and other forms of civic philanthropy. It's not a centerpiece in as many stories as it could or should be, but it's not not a thing.

Sinces supes himself canonically complains that Gotham has way too much lead plus the Joker and pals never having problems getting armies of thugs, then the only logic conclusion is that Wayne Entrerprises is being really inneficient with the way their spend their money for such causes.

And Batman doesn't pretend to be a morally perfect platonic ideal of heroism. For the record, I fully agree that dragging under-18s into combat situations against villains with guns is completely reprehensible, but (A) modern versions of the Dark Knight technically don't do that, and (B) Superman will never run into this problem, because Metropolis has virtually no crime, because he is Superman. He can hear a pin drop from 20 miles away, identify the manufacturers' serial number from the sound it makes, be there at hypersonic speed, see thugs hiding behind walls, and freeze them in place without taking a scratch from knives or bullets. Of course his city is going to be squeaky-clean by comparison, but it's not because Batman's methods are inefficient. It's because Batman is drastically weaker than Superman.

I consider it ridiculous to assert that Batman could stand up to Mongul or Bizarro in a fist-fight, but I'm also not going to pretend that any member of Batman's rogues' gallery is going to present a special problem to Big Blue. Which immediately raises the question of why Supes doesn't allocate a little spare time to cleaning up adjacent urban areas. People are perfectly happy to accuse Batman of being a brutalising sadist who kills off child-soldiers, but nobody talks about the 7.29 ongoing rapes that Superman must be statistically ignoring every time he vacations on the family farm.

Says who? Do we have rape statistics for the DC universe? If nothing else, the risk of trying to assault a disguised super-heroine (or even a super villainess) would be a powerful deterrent.

Besides there's 1,8 people dying every second in the planet, and that's not counting non-lethal attacks. Even supes would struggle to keep watch over 7 billion of humies and he needs his leisure time. I'll rather have the godlike alien have some time to relax rather than get too stressed and decide to take over the planet (which he has done in several alternate universes), in particular when supes is the humies only real hope when Darkseid or Doomsday come knocking.

Basically supes gets a lot slack because he stops major world/galaxy/universe threats all the time and still finds time to keep his city a nice place.

There are two main criticisms of Batman in this regard.

1) That he fails to put down his villains permanently, and therefore allows further rampages.

Counterexample: Punisher kills plenty of people, but doesn't ever run out of people to kill or improve New York.

Well yeah New York has millions of people and the Punisher's never been very picky about who's ok to kill. He'll probably die without having run out of people to shoot.

Bats however keeps struggling with the same dozen or so crazy gangsters.

2) That he doesn't do social initiatives (untrue) or is beating people up at the expense of the underlying issues, and that this is a specific Batman problem.

Counterexample: Marvel New York, with dozens of superhero residents, including multiple billionaires, tech geniuses, etc, are unable between all of them to enact long term change or quell the constant supervillain attacks, but are not called on this. Meanwhile, because Batman by himself with no superpowers cannot fix one city, he is constantly called on it.

As pointed above, most of Marvel's supervillains are actually super and/or have powerful organizations backing them up. Loki is a god, Magneto is a mighty mutant with an army of mighty mutants, Dr. Doom has his own country, the Phoenix will keep coming back to possess people, Hydra has countless cells and even had Captain America as their sleeper agent (which alone can explain a lot of those troubles since being one of the main avengers and even the president of the USA at one point would leave Steve Rogers in the perfect position to sabotage whatever he felt like).

There's also the bit where in Marvelverse the government and superheroes clash quite a lot. Maybe the X-men could've solved crime in the city by now if they weren't being hunted down by killer giant robots paid by tax dollars all the time (and indeed they eventually just walked away and started their own island-state).

But Bats can actually count with the Gotham police to work with him yet struggles with some powerless crazy clown?

[darkdragoon]

Comics have the paradox of many takes on the same character but also tremendous inertia to hold to a certain status quo. Now most will go with "the inmates run the asylum now, thus evil Cap and Gordon Batman" but it's like Shooter didn't change things,and surely DC wouldn't have done something like kill Supergirl in an 80s crossover don't be silly.

Even most of the deader than dead characters have come back multiple times.

That said,
The Joker is not normal especially in more recent offerings with vague hints that dance around chaos and the like. Regardless he's effective enough to have henchmen and also attracts fanatical followers (like Harley Quinn.)

Most of Batman's other main rogues are essentially aspects.
Riddler- brilliant and deductive but also very obsessive
Penguin- uses his wealth and status not to mention outright murder and theft for petty desires
Two-Face- the man who was going to save Gotham yet fell to his own darkside
Ra's al Ghul- humanity must be purged to save it

The Court of Owls has also been introduced as the shadowy organization that does its best to keep Gotham corrupt.

[Lacuna Caster]

Then give the Joker supernatural powers and/or a powerful backing up organization like every other major supervillain.

I don't think that's likely to happen, because that would make him not-the-joker and defeat the purpose of the character. Again, I don't think it's an especially good thing, but there's nothing peculiar about this compared to other supervillains. (I would also point out that the various Robins and Batgirls are also functionally immortal, so if you're going to drag in meta-textual factors it's not like Batman can really endanger them.)

Sinces supes himself canonically complains that Gotham has way too much lead plus the Joker and pals never having problems getting armies of thugs, then the only logic conclusion is that Wayne Entrerprises...

Deuterio, this is not a subjective judgement call. Go google 'Wayne Enterprises' and just look up the wiki entries. They can cite, chapter and verse, exactly how Bruce Wayne spends time and money on improving his city across a broad spectrum of investment policies. You are objectively wrong, so kindly stop beating this horse.

Says who? Do we have rape statistics for the DC universe? If nothing else, the risk of trying to assault a disguised super-heroine (or even a super villainess) would be a powerful deterrent.

Besides there's 1,8 people dying every second in the planet, and that's not counting non-lethal attacks. Even supes would struggle to keep watch over 7 billion of humies and he needs his leisure time. I'll rather have the godlike alien have some time to relax rather than get too stressed and decide to take over the planet...

Dear Gods, are you listening to yourself? Do you really think the DC universe, which contains, among other things, Gotham City, is so distanced from our own world that there isn't a serious crime happening somewhere every hour of every day? And do you really think this is how Clark Kent's internal thought-processes work? "Gee, I guess I could stop a few hundred people from being murdered or sexually assaulted this weekend, but I already filled my quota and I need some 'me time'. They should be grateful I don't just conquer the world." Yeah, nothing says 'paragon of altruism' like arbitrary ticket-punching.

Meanwhile, Batman is hitting the streets again with 3 cracked ribs and a mild concussion, because sleep is for the weak.

[Frozen_Feet]

A lot of the better Superman stories do discuss the problem of not being able to save everybody, with Superman occasionally having a shrine for what's essentially all the prayers he didn't answer.

But those stories also make it fairly clear that Supes is not and cannot be obligated to save everybody. The morality in his actions is best viewed from the perspective that he doesn't need to do even this much, but does it anyway.

This also gets to a distinction between Supes and Bats. For Bats, Bruce Wayne is the mask. Civilian life is a cover-up for who he really is. For Supes, Clark Kent is who is he is, and the blue spandex is the mask. If Clark can't take a break and be just a normal guy every once in a while, we get Red Son or other dystopy where a Superman detached from humanity rules with an iron fist.

Batman is a guy who has obsession with crime due to past trauma. Supes is a dude from Kansas who does his equivalent of Boy Scout charity work after his day job. Sure, Supes may feel bad of the about 7 rapes and 20 muggings he has to ignore when he wants to have dinner with his family, but that's something he has to make his peace with, because at his power level there is always someone he could save, and always other people that will be left unsaved no matter what he does. We allow "arbitrary ticket punching" for fire fighters and voluntary workers, so Clark's earned that too.

[deuterio12]

A lot of the better Superman stories do discuss the problem of not being able to save everybody, with Superman occasionally having a shrine for what's essentially all the prayers he didn't answer.

But those stories also make it fairly clear that Supes is not and cannot be obligated to save everybody. The morality in his actions is best viewed from the perspective that he doesn't need to do even this much, but does it anyway.

This also gets to a distinction between Supes and Bats. For Bats, Bruce Wayne is the mask. Civilian life is a cover-up for who he really is. For Supes, Clark Kent is who is he is, and the blue spandex is the mask. If Clark can't take a break and be just a normal guy every once in a while, we get Red Son or other dystopy where a Superman detached from humanity rules with an iron fist.

Batman is a guy who has obsession with crime due to past trauma. Supes is a dude from Kansas who does his equivalent of Boy Scout charity work after his day job. Sure, Supes may feel bad of the about 7 rapes and 20 muggings he has to ignore when he wants to have dinner with his family, but that's something he has to make his peace with, because at his power level there is always someone he could save, and always other people that will be left unsaved no matter what he does. We allow "arbitrary ticket punching" for fire fighters and voluntary workers, so Clark's earned that too.

What Frozen_Feet said.

Also Supes doesn't waste gods knows how many millions in inneficient enterprises that refuse to release any hard numbers to the public and have the end result that in recent decades, the portrayal of Gotham has been as a dark and foreboding place rife with crime, grime, and corruption as per the wiki itself. Gotham is explicitly been getting worst for a lloooonnggg time, but Bats refuses to change his methods.

[Devonix]

Superman also serves as a beacon. What he does is he inspires people. He inspires the average citizen to be better, to help people. He inspires those with powers to use those powers for the good of all. Superman simply by existing makes the world better.

Yes him going out and saving people is amazing. But his most important super power is that he makes others want to go out and save people.

If Superman can't be everywhere it's ok, because his example ensures that someone else will be.

[Z3ro]

Deuterio, this is not a subjective judgement call. Go google 'Wayne Enterprises' and just look up the wiki entries. They can cite, chapter and verse, exactly how Bruce Wayne spends time and money on improving his city across a broad spectrum of investment policies. You are objectively wrong, so kindly stop beating this horse.

This one has always bothered me. I mean, given just how bad Gotham City is at any given time, how much worse would it be without these initiatives? I think the question isn't does Wayne Enterprises work to improve the social situation, its given the state of the city, are they really doing the best they could? Because if they are, wow, that city would be a crater without them.