New Rants at "World's Finest"

[Alex Weitzman]

Not that I'm a shameless promoter or anything..........promote promote promote promote promote......

I've had a couple of essays added to the site, and on Bird Boy's blessing, I figured I'd start up this thread to foster discussion on the topics. Here's the links to the essays and quick summaries of what they touch on:

The Blame Game: A Look at Old Wounds and the Dick-Bruce-Barbara Conflict (http://www.worldsfinestonline.com/WF/sections/fanworks/edits/weitzman/01.php)

One of the most hotly debated topics in the DCAU fandom is what went on between Gotham's heroes in regards to romance. In this essay, one particular episode in The New Batman Adventures is looked at for its collision of two different conflicts, how successfully it handled them, and what it means for the rest of the DCAU.

Frostbite - Victor Fries' Eternal Conflict (http://www.worldsfinestonline.com/WF/sections/fanworks/edits/weitzman/02.php)

In five appearances, Mr. Freeze achieves more with less screen time than many other villains do with more. Why? Here, each of the four episodes (and SubZero) is looked at in regards to Freeze's place within the Bat-universe, and maybe also addressing the least appreciated elements in his five-appearance arc.

(It only now occurs to me that the word "conflict" is in both titles. I'll try not to do that again next time.....oh, well, maybe after my next essay: Conflict Conflict Conflict Batman Conflict Johnny Bravo Conflict.)

[Revelator]

I think the most impressive section of the Old Wounds essay is the final segment--your taking the episode apart and diagnosing how it fails to cohere. I think authorial indirection and sloppy writing offer a better explanation for Barbara's actions than a psychological portrait derived from her appearances. I never got the sense that the writers and producers had a solid conception of what character she might have; instead she's gone through herky-jerky shifts that leave her with even less of a definable personality. (And let's face it, Hillary Bader and Rich Fogel aren't the writers one thinks of when it comes to searing character portraits.) There needed to be more central planning in Barbara's case, and we got a bit in Batman Beyond, but by then it was too late. I'm one of the few people who found the later period Bruce/Barbara relationship intriguing because it suggests that there are limits to even Bruce's willpower--very few people choose to fall in love, and for Bruce at the time, it might have seemed like he'd found his ultimate match: a mate who was not only comfortable with his career, but also helped him out. Barbara got out of the relationship because the career came before a relationship, but if she'd consented to being beloved but second-class in his priorities and affections, I wonder what might have happened (might he have decided she was the one, and married her?). I don't know if Bruce neccesarily felt guilt about sleeping with Gordon's daughter--in a way, Bruce and Barbara shacking up to fight crime together as a couple is a sort of ideal uniting of Batman and Gordon's aims and friendship. Gordon is after all only a metaphorical father figure. He's also a close friend.

I think your treatment of fan reaction to Freeze at his most and least sympathetic is pretty much spot-on. I'm one of the few people who disliked Meltdown, though after half a decade I'd have to rewatch the episode to poinpoint my criticisms (I remember first seeing the graveyard scene and getting irked that Freeze was just visiting his old body rather than Nora. Freeze treating Terry as though he were Bruce was also off-putting in a way, seeing how unforgiving Bruce had become of a man who's apprently killed an entire family. Was Terry being more Batmanish is hoping for Freeze's redemption?). I enjoyed Cold Comfort, much for the reasons you gave for its validity. My deeper problem with Mr.Freeze is that they basically had to keep putting him through new and weirder hoops to keep using him as a villain. What began as a very small-scale human tragedy eventually grew turgid and tortuous. I think rot set in when Nora was resurrected, which was no more permissable for me than bringing back Bruce's parents or the Flying Graysons. But without bringing her back, the character's options for reuse were limited: except for adapting his Holiday Adventures story, Freeze would have been hard to reuse. Ultimately, I think I'd have preferred for the character to appear in the Holiday segment and then never be used again. Though, come to think of it, I think Freeze might have worked in Trial...as a witness for the defense. If you really wanted it to be a serious courtroom drama, you could have had Freeze up there on the stand deriding the judge and jury as deluded fools and saying that Batman had no part in his creation, and had only wanted to stop him from committing murder (and I doubt that Dini would have tried anything comical with the character--we owe the serious, tragic Mr.Freeze to Dini in the first place).

[Style]

Quickly, Revelator, your idea for Freeze in Trial is a wicked one. I would love to see that. Who knows, maybe it would have been there had the story been DTV or 2 parter sized.

Ah Alex, Nice essays. Meaty, yet not over stayed. I'd say it was like enjoying a great 8 oz. filet and savering every bite. As opposed to Old Maid's essays, which are like showing up for an All-you-can-eat buffet at lunch and staying for dinner too. (That's not a dig at Old maid. I love her stuff.)

What I find most interesting about your Nightwing et al article is the idea that Barbara is far more centrel to the conflict and Nightwing's disposition than Bruce is. I think often the Bruce/Dick conflict is so focused upon that people miss the subtlety of the interaction. In my own Nightwing article, (the one which ultimately asserted that Old Wounds may be better served by being shoved at the front of the TNBA canon, ahead of the other Nightwing appearances,) that while Dick's relationship with Bruce was shifting, there was a universal disdain for Barbara pretty much all the way through. Indeed, that while evidence suggests that Dick and Bruce may have Ultimately kissed and made up, (or at least tried to,) Dick never made any attempt to forgive her.

Old wounds is a situation where I have felt that while Dick thinks he's mad at Bruce, he's really mad at Barbara, and is a little unwilling to admit it. Maybe it's because recognizes the betrayal of Barbara but is unwilling to lay the blame for it at her feet. I don't know if I'm trying to make a point, I just sort of started typing thoughts.

One thing that your article actually made me think of is if at some level Barbara recognizes her own culpability in the situation. True, in "Curare," she blames everyone but herself, but it's interesting to consider Nightwing's role in "Over the Edge." If she really thought that the root of Dick's problem was Bruce, then it seems her Nightmare should have reflected a scenario where Dick helps Gordon hunt Bruce Down. Instead, he comes riding in like the cavalary to Bruce and Tim's rescue, and doesn't blame Bruce in the slightest for what happens. Is this part of her Nightmaric structure? That she acknowledges her role in their split, and that her prescense is the one thing preventing a reconcilliation? After all, she hallucinates Bruce and Dick reconciling literally over her dead body, not to mention how Jovial he is at times. I guess it's not quite "dancing on her grave," but...

[Alex Weitzman]

I think the most impressive section of the Old Wounds essay is the final segment--your taking the episode apart and diagnosing how it fails to cohere. I think authorial indirection and sloppy writing offer a better explanation for Barbara's actions than a psychological portrait derived from her appearances. I never got the sense that the writers and producers had a solid conception of what character she might have; instead she's gone through herky-jerky shifts that leave her with even less of a definable personality. (And let's face it, Hillary Bader and Rich Fogel aren't the writers one thinks of when it comes to searing character portraits.) There needed to be more central planning in Barbara's case, and we got a bit in Batman Beyond, but by then it was too late.
Well, I'd have to disagree. I think she's been consistent; it's just that she's been consistently flighty. I Am The Night and Heart of Steel, being her first appearances, have her a little more grounded, but like I said in the essay, even the end of Heart admits some of that weakness of hers. I recently rewatched Shadow of the Bat after having written this essay, and it's actually less helpful to her in justifying her actions. She is justified for putting on a costume in one scene, and one scene alone - at the rally. Everything after that is from the attitude of, "Hey, I can do this stuff." Barbara's a cop's daughter; she has to be familiar with the fact that they don't hand you a badge and a gun when you walk in and ask to be an officer. She blatantly ignores it because, let's face it, she finds superheroics fun. Therefore, from the very beginning, she approaches the battlefield from a frivolous position, nurses her cute crushes, and has the world's most enjoyable hobby. Yeah, that'll last.


I'm one of the few people who found the later period Bruce/Barbara relationship intriguing because it suggests that there are limits to even Bruce's willpower--very few people choose to fall in love, and for Bruce at the time, it might have seemed like he'd found his ultimate match: a mate who was not only comfortable with his career, but also helped him out. Barbara got out of the relationship because the career came before a relationship, but if she'd consented to being beloved but second-class in his priorities and affections, I wonder what might have happened (might he have decided she was the one, and married her?). I don't know if Bruce neccesarily felt guilt about sleeping with Gordon's daughter--in a way, Bruce and Barbara shacking up to fight crime together as a couple is a sort of ideal uniting of Batman and Gordon's aims and friendship. Gordon is after all only a metaphorical father figure. He's also a close friend.
And how good would you feel about sleeping with a close friend's daughter? I'm convinced that the physical relationship between Bruce and Barbara must've been extremely short. Indeed, if it was just a highly regrettable one-night stand that makes Bruce disgusted with himself, it would explain a great deal of the way Barbara Beyond interprets the break between the two of them. Imagine that Bruce, after the one night, eventually comes to Barbara and says that their night together was a mistake. Barbara, both hurt and prideful, insists that they are a mistake, and walks out entirely. She tells herself that Bruce just can't give up the night job, and that's why he can't accept her love. So, she convinces herself to turn the love into condescension, pity, and even hatred, and that's where Barbara Beyond is when we first tune in.


I think your treatment of fan reaction to Freeze at his most and least sympathetic is pretty much spot-on.
I should note, both here and earlier, my thanks for your kind words on the essays. :)


I remember first seeing the graveyard scene and getting irked that Freeze was just visiting his old body rather than Nora.
He might have. We just needed to know what he did with his old head. Additionally, given that the dialogue at the grave was about a new life while he looked longingly into Stephanie's eyes, it would have been a tad perverse to do this scene at Nora's grave.


Freeze treating Terry as though he were Bruce was also off-putting in a way, seeing how unforgiving Bruce had become of a man who's apprently killed an entire family. Was Terry being more Batmanish is hoping for Freeze's redemption?
I love it because it's here that Freeze confirms that he sees Batman for his actions and not his identity. The "Batman" persona is one that, to him, represents the desire to save life at the most possible level, an idea that Freeze doesn't always agree with because of his lust for vengeance, but he has doubtlessly always admired it. That Terry can be treated this way just as much as Bruce would have back in the day is a grand confirmation for Terry's appropriateness as Batman. :)


Though, come to think of it, I think Freeze might have worked in Trial...as a witness for the defense. If you really wanted it to be a serious courtroom drama, you could have had Freeze up there on the stand deriding the judge and jury as deluded fools and saying that Batman had no part in his creation, and had only wanted to stop him from committing murder (and I doubt that Dini would have tried anything comical with the character--we owe the serious, tragic Mr.Freeze to Dini in the first place).
While, as you know, I disagree with the whole basic premise of Trial, what you just proposed is certainly a very true idea for Freeze. It is unknown how Freeze really feels about other Arkham inmates, but I'd suspect he holds them in just as much contempt as you described. The one complaint I'd have is that as a protective fan of Freeze, I'd worry about him being in danger; is his suit even at Arkham?

[Style]

While, as you know, I disagree with the whole basic premise of Trial, what you just proposed is certainly a very true idea for Freeze. It is unknown how Freeze really feels about other Arkham inmates, but I'd suspect he holds them in just as much contempt as you described. The one complaint I'd have is that as a protective fan of Freeze, I'd worry about him being in danger; is his suit even at Arkham? Is HE even at Arkham? Yeah, that's where they first stuck him, but Grant's robot actually broke Freeze out of Stonegate. He may not have even been at Arkham at the time of "Trial."

[Alex Weitzman]

Ah Alex, Nice essays. Meaty, yet not over stayed. I'd say it was like enjoying a great 8 oz. filet and savering every bite. As opposed to Old Maid's essays, which are like showing up for an All-you-can-eat buffet at lunch and staying for dinner too. (That's not a dig at Old maid. I love her stuff.)As do I. I wish I had her talent for research. I tend to get down to analysis and (in some cases) opinion, which usually takes less time to explain than explaining history.


Old wounds is a situation where I have felt that while Dick thinks he's mad at Bruce, he's really mad at Barbara, and is a little unwilling to admit it. Maybe it's because recognizes the betrayal of Barbara but is unwilling to lay the blame for it at her feet. I don't know if I'm trying to make a point, I just sort of started typing thoughts.Oh, no, no, you're hitting the nail on the head. Like I said in the essay, Dick slugs Bruce, but if he were really paying attention, he'd probably want to slug Barbara instead (as non-PC as that is :sweat: ). There's arguments going on in Old Wounds. One is about understanding and nobility as a hero. The other is about loyalty and trust as a person. Only the former is answered by the end of the episode.


One thing that your article actually made me think of is if at some level Barbara recognizes her own culpability in the situation. True, in "Curare," she blames everyone but herself, but it's interesting to consider Nightwing's role in "Over the Edge." If she really thought that the root of Dick's problem was Bruce, then it seems her Nightmare should have reflected a scenario where Dick helps Gordon hunt Bruce Down. Instead, he comes riding in like the cavalary to Bruce and Tim's rescue, and doesn't blame Bruce in the slightest for what happens. Is this part of her Nightmaric structure? That she acknowledges her role in their split, and that her prescense is the one thing preventing a reconcilliation? After all, she hallucinates Bruce and Dick reconciling literally over her dead body, not to mention how Jovial he is at times. I guess it's not quite "dancing on her grave," but...An excellent point. I've been thinking about Over the Edge recently, which I haven't been able to rewatch in a while (can't wait for Vol. 4). There's a few episodes in which Barbara seems to understand her life and her position as a hero more than usual. In Over the Edge, it's defined by her absence. In a way, it's like she sees herself as a bridge between the police and the vigilantes (and in some ways, she is, as a police profiler or whatever her desk job is). I'm not sure if this is a needlessly egotistical opinion to have of oneself, or if I'm misphrasing it - again, a rewatch will do wonders - but she is at least proven right in the end when Gordon reveals in so many words that he does indeed know about her and the whole Bat-family and still approves.

[Alex Weitzman]

Is HE even at Arkham? Yeah, that's where they first stuck him, but Grant's robot actually broke Freeze out of Stonegate. He may not have even been at Arkham at the time of "Trial."
Was it? I thought it was the same cell from before.

[Revelator]

Well, I'd have to disagree. I think she's been consistent; it's just that she's been consistently flighty. We'll have to leave it as a disagreement then: I've never really gotten the sense that she's a coherent character. I think she suffers from being the problematic girl in a boy's show. It's fun to build a portrait of her flaws, but I think she's ultimately more a victim of the writers, who never had a sure sense of where to go with her, than of whatever flaws she might have. If she's really so frivolous, rather than a victim of unsure writing, then the writers fell into the trap that silver age writers fell into with Batgirl.


She is justified for putting on a costume in one scene, and one scene alone - at the rally. Yeah, but then the episode couldn't introduce Batgirl into the series. And what the execs want, the execs must get. We know (except Disneyboy, who has a lingering mysterious affection for this mediocre two-parter) that Shadow of the Bat isn't one of the best-written or most memorable episodes--partly because it has the curse of most origin episodes. Barbara has to re-don the costume because Batgirl has to be a recurring character. And the writers weren't good enough to make her taking up the mantle seem fully warranted. Barbara's re-donning the costume can be seen as symptomatic of her later frivolity. Or it can be symptomatic of the mediocre-to-poor writing that went on to plague her, forcing her vaporous character to conform to situations rather than making situations conform to her character.


And how good would you feel about sleeping with a close friend's daughter? If it wasn't a betrayal of that friend, and the affection developed naturally and consentually, and there wasn't a huge age difference, I wouldn't feel like much of a heel for falling into such a relationship. And it's only my hunch, but I don't think Jim Gordon would be overly outraged by it either. There are probably worse boyfriends for one's daughter. My assumption is that Bruce and Barbara became a couple after the events of the flashback in Return of the Joker. I'm also assuming that if Gordon didn't already know that Barbara was Batgirl and Wayne was Batman (as the end of Over the Edge hints), that he was told so after he was called to arkham to hush up what happened to the Joker. Provided that he was reconciled with the idea of his daughter putting herself in harm's way by being Batgirl, and knowing how much he's admired Batman's character, I think he might have thought the idea of Barbara and Bruce as a couple to be somehow appropriate--just as Barbara did. Bruce and Barbara were drawn together by a shared passion for fighting crime, and when that resulted in a further passion, the latter only helped to reinforce the former. Bruce's motivations for sleeping with her ultimately weren't along the lines of anything like "Boy, she's got a great ass." So I don't think Bruce would have been particularly guilt-ridden. Hell, if being part of couple with her aided his mission, he might have been very happy with the relationship. These are all my conjectures of course, but since we have so little screentime devoted to their relationship and the post-flashback TNBA, I feel justified in employing them.

I may be wrong, but in Batman Beyond Bruce never showed any real guilt over the nature of the relationship. When he looks at Barbara's pictures (note the plural!) in Out of the Past, his expression seems to be regret that the relationship didn't work out, not that it happened in the first place.


I'm convinced that the physical relationship between Bruce and Barbara must've been extremely short. As wishful thinking that's wonderful, since it ultimately backs up your thesis about Barbara's character, but in lieu of evidence of Bruce's guilt it's still wishful thinking. You want the relationship to reflect badly on Barbara, though the explanation that Bruce simply put the mission above her squares far more with his consistency of character throughout several series.


Additionally, given that the dialogue at the grave was about a new life while he looked longingly into Stephanie's eyes, it would have been a tad perverse to do this scene at Nora's grave. But more interesting. It would have been even more so if Nora and Stephanie had looked alike.



The one complaint I'd have is that as a protective fan of Freeze, I'd worry about him being in danger; is his suit even at Arkham? Well, unless he stays in his cell 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, they'd need to have some way of letting him go out of his immediate confines. Perhaps a depowered make-shift suit?

[James]

And how good would you feel about sleeping with a close friend's daughter? I'm convinced that the physical relationship between Bruce and Barbara must've been extremely short.


I've never understood this. Barbara, by the time it's implied there is any relationship, is well over adult age. Bruce is a respected colleague of Gordon, whom Gordon respects. This isn't a sleeping with your best friends child, it's have a relationship with an adult relative.

It seems to me, that fans actually make this far more dirty than it suggests and the deride it for being ooky. I'm not aiming that at you Alex, but it does seem the rationale against Bruce and Barbara is often more based in the viewers ethics than what is implied on screen.

Furthermore, I would like to think - as fan's do not like to think the worst of Bruce - that it was longer than shorter. Shorter just makes it worse, yet somehow fans seem to think it's better it was a quick forgotten thing.

As I've said before, the implication in Batman Beyond is that it was a deeper thing for both parties. It seems to have created a certain amount or distance (and maybe a little resentment from Barb) and Bruce seems to look back at Barb as the love of his life (being the final long held picture on his computer in OOTP). The fact that something seems to happen in MOTB seems to apply a two stage affair. One in which she's after him (and maybe he's done something he regrets) and the BB implication that her leaving Bruce was partially to do with Batman. That again implies something happened near the end of her career as Batgirl. So while neither argument has confirmed facts, the show postulates an on/off thing or maybe a two part romance. Certainly more evidence for this than a "one night stand" which to me, as a Batman fan, is far more deplorable and doesn't really tally with Bruce's affection for her in Batman Beyond.


Indeed, if it was just a highly regrettable one-night stand that makes Bruce disgusted with himself, it would explain a great deal of the way Barbara Beyond interprets the break between the two of them. Imagine that Bruce, after the one night, eventually comes to Barbara and says that their night together was a mistake. Barbara, both hurt and prideful, insists that they are a mistake, and walks out entirely. She tells herself that Bruce just can't give up the night job, and that's why he can't accept her love. So, she convinces herself to turn the love into condescension, pity, and even hatred, and that's where Barbara Beyond is when we first tune in.


My problem here, is the writer is having to build his own scenerios to fit his premise rather than base it on what's in the show. I think there is a big danger there of looking for evidence to support one's opinion out of one's own imagination.

There is no concrete answer to this and words can be taken with different inference, but I see little between what we see and what is said which implies it was a one night stand.

This I feel is the danger when breaking down a character study, be careful not to embelish it TOO much with one's own opinion!

Other than that, nice work Alex. I must confess, I side with Revelator with this, but you've made people talk so what you've succeeded in making an interesting addition to the WF archives!

[The Old Maid]

Glad to hear Alex sent those pieces in to WF. Awesome work, as usual.

Although they strike me more as Pro Vs. Con than Rants (which used to be Jim Harvey's playground for non-Bat related, well, rants). That, and there's a weird link on the page. The 13b link bleeds down into the entire Croc's Comedy paragraph.

Heh, you think Barbara is a thinly written character who leaves room for (too much) personal interpretation? I've seen thinner. The difference is that in too many other mythos we were never intended to like certain characters, whereas we were intended to like Barbara. Then the writers go and have her do unlikeable things, or if you prefer, onscreen erratic things combined with unprecedented offscreen suggestions. So, much of her "bank account" is filled with whatever credit the individual fan is willing to extend to her.

I wouldn't mind seeing Freeze show up in "Trial," though. He and Two-Face have strong opinions on fate and futility, but those opinions are not interchangeable. Could've been fun.

And I can too write short posts! :D

[Arsenal]

Thoughtful, I especially enjoy your analysis of Barbara's motivation.

Bruce/Dick/Barbara is almost an anti-oedipal tale. The father banishes the son and takes his girlfriend, as opposed to the son killing his father and claiming his mother. (Perhaps banish is an inappropriate term, but Dick's departure was certainly precipitated by his relationship with Bruce.)

Dick's absence in BB is unfortunate. His character could have been used to reconcile Bruce, Barbara, and Tim. But instead, that became the job of the new guy, Terry. (No complaints, Terry is a fascinating character also.)

The question of "Did Dick ever make his peace with Bruce?" darkens the later-Beyond stories, Epilogue and ROTJ. Yes, Bruce has a biological son in Terry. He even bridged the gap with surrogate son Tim in ROTJ. (He even has quasi-grandchildren thanks to Drake. I would have loved a scene of Old Man Wayne playing with the children.) But the "first born" never returns to Gotham. Did he die first? Did he retire and marry some bodacious alien chick? (Cross-continuity, Fone Bone will love it.) I believe some fans clamor for Nightwing:TAS because so much of his story has been left untold. He never received his bookend like most other key members of the Bat pantheon. The only other protagonists who have been likewise shafted are Alfred and Commissioner Gordan.

Bruce: Finds peace with biological son.
Terry: Accepts the mantle of the Bat on his terms.
Barbara: Forgives Bruce for his past callousness.
Tim: Is able to heal from the 'rape' he suffered.

Even key villains (Ra's, Joker, Mr. Freeze) were given satisfying conclusions, but not Dick. This is a shame because Dick, not Bruce, is the POV character. In golden age comic books, children pictured themselves as the sidekicks because they could not be invulnerable Kryptonians or Amazon princesses. Likewise, many of us grew up seeing ourselves as Robin. We watched Dick transition from sidekick to ally, but we never received the payoff of seeing him as a fullblown hero.

[Alex Weitzman]

I've never understood this. Barbara, by the time it's implied there is any relationship, is well over adult age. Bruce is a respected colleague of Gordon, whom Gordon respects. This isn't a sleeping with your best friends child, it's have a relationship with an adult relative.
I may be wrong, but in Batman Beyond Bruce never showed any real guilt over the nature of the relationship. When he looks at Barbara's pictures (note the plural!) in Out of the Past, his expression seems to be regret that the relationship didn't work out, not that it happened in the first place.
We don't know what he's thinking there. But we do know that Bruce in the present is being thrown off by Barb's advances, as seen in Batwoman. This implies that Bruce is surprised, perhaps even scared by what Barbara is getting at. That's why I think Bruce's relationship with Barbara probably wouldn't amount to that much time.

If there were no Dick Grayson, Bruce and Barbara could probably be together without too much difficulty. Jim's as old as Thomas Wayne would be (I Am The Night), so Bruce is at son-level for Jim if they are so inclined to take that road. Two troubles with that, though. One: no episode has ever made note of the older/younger age thing between Jim and Bruce beyond Bruce's own recognition of it in the aforementioned angstfest. Jim and Batman are on equal grounds and they treat each other that way, and even when Jim and Bruce are together (like in Joker's Favor), Jim still treats Bruce like a contemporary. If Jim were capable of seeing Bruce in a son-in-law manner, it would have surfaced at some point.

Two (and more importantly): Jim favors Dick. SubZero makes this undeniable. Dick is Barbara's age, and the two kids have come together quite well on their own, with Jim in the background smiling all the way. The Old Maid said it well in "Wertham's Ghost": Jim watched Dick grow up at the side of Bruce Wayne. Because he endorses Dick as a suitor for his little one, he clearly must see Bruce as a fellow father, in spirit if not in blood. That means he certainly wouldn't approve of the switch from Dick to Bruce, no matter how much younger Bruce is than himself. As Jim himself might put it, "Take pity on an old man's blood pressure."

[Alex Weitzman]

Glad to hear Alex sent those pieces in to WF. Awesome work, as usual.Mucho gracias for the suggestion. :)

[James]

We don't know what he's thinking there. But we do know that Bruce in the present is being thrown off by Barb's advances, as seen in Batwoman. This implies that Bruce is surprised, perhaps even scared by what Barbara is getting at. That's why I think Bruce's relationship with Barbara probably wouldn't amount to that much time.

Still doesn't explain the implications that the relationship was longer and deeper than that as in ToC. The comments their implicitly make it something more than MotB portrayed. I don't think fans can bat OOTP off on the basis that we don't know what he's thinking (I've heard the comment before). In that sense we can't make any judgement over anyone's actions (Dick and Jim, for instance) on that basis. We NEVER know what they are truely thinking, but the drive of the drama is clear and implicit and I think ignoring the dramatic devices will make it harder to ascertain what is happening.

Bruce goes through his loves with Barbara last. The last is indeed relevant. He holds on that pic, in fact has two of her to one of all else. Talia prompts him and the audience with the line about loving her. It isn't denied and clearly given the sequence it's because there is a certain validity there.

I think if one ignores OOTP and places all their eggs in MOTB, one loses the chances of seeing the ficticiously working history. As I said, the best answer (and I by no means imply it's the ONLY answer) which takes into account MOTB, TOC and OOTP is that there were two stages. One early on where Bruce bats her off, and one later when maybe the struggle in Gotham gets more intense. Maybe post ROTJ. That would work better with the dialogue in TOC.

It's fiction of course, so there is no real answer, just a great TV show. However, as an analysis, I don't think you can take MOTB as being bona fide proof of a one attempt relationship when other sources so clearly point otherwise.



If there were no Dick Grayson, Bruce and Barbara could probably be together without too much difficulty. Jim's as old as Thomas Wayne would be (I Am The Night), so Bruce is at son-level for Jim if they are so inclined to take that road. Two troubles with that, though. One: no episode has ever made note of the older/younger age thing between Jim and Bruce beyond Bruce's own recognition of it in the aforementioned angstfest. Jim and Batman are on equal grounds and they treat each other that way, and even when Jim and Bruce are together (like in Joker's Favor), Jim still treats Bruce like a contemporary. If Jim were capable of seeing Bruce in a son-in-law manner, it would have surfaced at some point.


I think there you are wandering down the dangerous route of analysing possiblities with no evidence to support them, again, possibly it's the more favourable outcome (than having to accept the icky factor).

We don't know how Jim reacted. We know something happened, that's for sure. We can't argue on Jim's reaction, or Dick's really so why analyse what we don't know. Personally, I think Jim in DCAU is a lot softer than in the comics. He seems to just want what's best for his daughter. If he truely believes in her and respects Bruce, then I could see him accepting it. Be it hindsight, Barbara refers to Dick as a crush. Could be with few years out of the picture and the Dick becoming more aggressive and isolatory, that Jim's previous interest in Dick and Barb may fade.

Personally, I think Jim, despite being quite conservative, is rather open minded with his girl (as Over The Edge implies) and if he feels she's genuinely happy, then he'd put that over any issues he had. She's an adult, it's her life. He may not understand it, but he may go for it.

But in the end, WHO KNOWS? :) I could be totally wrong. He may have been utterly against it. He may have seen playboy Bruce Wayne taking advantage of his daughter.. we don't know. It doesn't matter either. We have evidence supporting a potentially short and long term relationship, we have no evidence in how Jim reacted and if it had any effect. So clearly whatever Jim felt about Dick/Bruce/Barb didn't stop what happened happening. Dick and Jim are not as vital to this argument as people would expect given what we know to what we don't know.


Two (and more importantly): Jim favors Dick. SubZero makes this undeniable. Dick is Barbara's age, and the two kids have come together quite well on their own, with Jim in the background smiling all the way. The Old Maid said it well in "Wertham's Ghost": Jim watched Dick grow up at the side of Bruce Wayne. Because he endorses Dick as a suitor for his little one, he clearly must see Bruce as a fellow father, in spirit if not in blood. That means he certainly wouldn't approve of the switch from Dick to Bruce, no matter how much younger Bruce is than himself. As Jim himself might put it, "Take pity on an old man's blood pressure."

Again speculation. Well thought out I grant you, but still roaming in what ifs rather than dealing with what we're told. In a Utopia, Jim might been able to forbade the pain. But DCAU isn't perfect and Bruce and Barb clearly made a mistake for different reasons. Bruce lives alone for decades, Barbara clearly falls into a relationship which leaves her with regret. This isn't perfect and the history of BB tells us what practically did happen, and that comes regardless of what we could speculate what otherwise could be the case! :)

Nevertheless, it's all good promotion for your essays! ;)

[Revelator]

We don't know what he's thinking there. But we do know that Bruce in the present is being thrown off by Barb's advances, as seen in Batwoman. This implies that Bruce is surprised, perhaps even scared by what Barbara is getting at. That's why I think Bruce's relationship with Barbara probably wouldn't amount to that much time....Two (and more importantly): Jim favors Dick. SubZero makes this undeniable. As SSJ notes, Out of the Past damages the cogency of your theory. If he was disgusted with his relationship with Barbara, why does he keep two pictures of her--amidst a gallery of beloved old flames like Lois and Zatanna? We don't see any pictures of Andrea, presumably because it's an affair he'd like to forget. If he was disgusted at his relationship with Barbara, you'd think there'd be an absence of those pictures too. Instead he's gazing at them, as part of a photogallery composed of women he's loved. There's nothing to support any guilt or shame on Bruce's part. The fact that there are two pictures there, while the other women get one, suggests the opposite. Could someone who remembers the episode better than I tell us what Talia said to Bruce while he was viewing Bab's pictures, and what Bruce's reaction was? Anyway Alex, almost all of the time you're on sound theoretical ground, but I think this particular theory is shaky.

As for Sub-Zero and Batwoman...I've said before that I don't think Barbara's character progressed in a truly coherent or mapped out way. I want to introduce some speculation of my own to account for this. Mostly it involves the participation of Bruce Timm. Please correct me if I wrong, but I've heard that the idea of making Barbara and Bruce an item was Timm's. When told that it sounded "wrong," he replied (I'm not sure in which publication) that the wrongness was precisely why he made that choice. So, the main documents regarding the Babs/Bruce affair are Out of the Past, written by Paul Dini, and A Touch of Curare, written by Hillary J. Bader (one of the few women writers in the DCAU). We'll assume that these episodes were approved and guided to completion by the producers Bruce Timm, Paul Dini, Alan Burnett, and Glen Murakami. These episodes feature Bruce Timm's idea of what happened to Batgirl and Bruce.

Now, we move on to the entries that in many ways are opposed to that conception. Sub-Zero, which presents Dick and Barbara as a true couple, with Gordon's blessing, was directed by Boyd Kirkland and written by Kirkland and Randy Rogel. And it was also produced by Rogel and Kirkland. Bruce Timm, as far as I can tell, had no great involvement with the movie. Denizens of these boards know that Kirkland and Timm, while remaining on very good terms, have not always agreed about which directions the Batman-verse characters should take. So we can regard Sub-Zero as a specific, separate version of the Barbara we see later on, under Tim's input and control. Curare basically and unsubtly negates and challenges a good deal of the picture we see in Sub-Zero, just as Cold Comfort sits uneasily after Sub-Zero.

The same can be said for another Timm-less entry that features a Bruce/Barbara relationship that doesn't jibe with the Beyond version: Mystery of the Batwoman. This was written by Alan Burnett and Michael Reaves. We should immediately note that Reaves had not been involved with Batman Beyond or even TNBA, and that while Burnett was, his views of the characters were not always in alignment with Timm or Dini (To give one example, Dini writes, "Bruce, Glen Murakami and I had discussed Terry being Bruce Wayne's clone from day one. It was our secret ending for the series, though we never got a chance to use it. I remember Alan Burnett was 50-50 on the idea, which was part of the reason it was never fully explored"). If we go by the theory that what happened in Curare was Timm's way of overriding and revising Kirland and Rogel's conception, is the Batwoman scene between Bruce and Barbara (which presents Barbara's love as nothing more than a silly crush Bruce recoils from) essentially Burnett and Reaves' way of revising or shifting Timm's conception?

Barbara was made into Bruce's one-time lover by an act of centralized planning within one series. But Barbara wasn't afforded the same sort of centralized planning across the range of Sub-Zero and Batwoman, neither of which have any real story input from Timm and Dini. So while some feel comfrotable creating a portrait of the character from several rather incongrous appearances, I believe that Barbara Gordon, more than Batman and Robin, fell victim to several disparate, sometimes conflicting interpretations of her character, none of which were united by anything resembling a central gameplan, none of which seem in true alignment with each other. And unlike Batman and Robin, whose characters were essentially nailed by the end of BTAS, Barbara remained tentative at best. In other words, I think problems of authorial coordination across several incarnations are what truly plagued Barbara Gordon. Succesfully drawn characters arise from the author's strengths. Those are what allow us to build up a portrait of that character. When we try building a portrait that depends on the author's weaknesses (and in this case we are dealing with corporate authors, who as individuals have not always seen eye to eye and have not always fully coordinated their separate products), we wander into danger, especially if we don't take note of the context and circumstances of production influencing the works featuring that character.

[Alex Weitzman]

You guys have strong points. And no, I really can't explain OOTP's pictures, especially the fact that there's two. Bruce may not have just one emotion on the topic; love, or the confusions of love, have those kinds of tendencies. Also of note: Out of the Past does not deal with Bruce's lost loves quite as much as it deals with Bruce's old age (at least, this is how it is before Talia shows up and brings love back into the equation), so his reminiscing of old flames may have something to do with said flames being the passions of youth. Ergo, the thing with Barbara may even more potently represent those fires of youth, even when Bruce himself wasn't quite as privy to them as Barbara was. But I'm just speculating on the themes presented in the first few minutes of the episode; there's no specific dialogue or action that says as much.

The Timm-involvement issue is one we're bound to go round and round with, as that little nugget keeps showing up in the debates over Static Shock and The Zeta Project. It's not one I'm fond to get into. However, I will say that I don't believe in levels of acceptability in regards to continuity. It's either in continuity or it's not. SubZero is, for instance, recognized as continuity by virtue of Freeze's further developments in The New Batman Adventures, which Timm obviously was involved in. Ergo, it is in continuity. Is there a sort of tug-of-war at work in regards to interpretations of Barbara? I don't see it; SubZero's use of the Dick/Barbara thing is totally borne out of B:TAS itself, and is also continuity given the way it's treated in Old Wounds. We have only Barbara's account of the affair to go on, but I must remind you that the account is suspect given the way she describes her time with Dick, which is continuity and is definitely not the "puppy love" she makes it out to be. So, to date, we don't know anything for sure. And we never will, unless it makes it on screen or Bruce tells us his side, neither of which seem likely at this point. Only Batwoman is, thus far, stand-alone, having no particular connections to anything else in continuity besides its one scene with Barbara, and naturally that has been the cause of much debate as seen in Old Maid's famed thread.

So, who's really to say? I think it's pretty consistent thus far: Barb gets with Dick, becomes Batgirl, almost goes all the way with him into commitment, dumps him when Batman lets her into his world, and we skip a few chapters and now she hates the old man for some romantic fracas that once occurred, the details of which are sketchy at best. It still fits b.t.'s seeming vision of the "wrongness". In fact, I'd say it fits it very well.

[Revelator]

The Timm-involvement issue is one we're bound to go round and round with, as that little nugget keeps showing up in the debates over Static Shock and The Zeta Project. It's not one I'm fond to get into. However, I will say that I don't believe in levels of acceptability in regards to continuity. It's either in continuity or it's not. That's really not an issue here, because everything is in continuity, but that continuity is not strictly coordinated. We're discussing a problem where a certain crucial development in a character's story came about due to the choice by a certain creator rather than another, so the circumstances of production count. It's less an issue of acceptability than of different creative teams taking a character one way and then another.

I don't regard Barbara's "puppy love" comment as being so much of a howler. This is a married woman in her 60s looking back over her life after having been in love with Bruce Wayne and her eventual husband the DA, both affairs that occurred when she was older and more mature. "Puppy love" is a term we use to describe love between the very young, and Barbara's application of it to her time with Grayson can just as easily be construed as her way of saying that at the time she was quite young, and that love was more a product of youthful ardor than a truly mature love. Barbara's dismissal of her time with Dick as "puppy love" may seem exaggerated to some, but I'd like to think that her reasons for diminishing it in retrospect are not petty. That dismissal is made by a woman we're meant to regard as a tough, seasoned old police commissioner who views Bruce and Terry as loose cannons. I have trouble viewing it as the resentful grouse of a jilted, emotional old battleaxe, who hates Bruce for dumping her. She tells Terry the story as a way of saying that being devoted to Bruce means only being devoted to his mission, and beind devoted to the mission is an inhuman goal that may get you shot or worse. It's her warning to yet another sidekick who may walk away bitter, like all the rest. Perhaps looking back over the years she finds that her love for Grayson really was a sort of puppy love in comparison to her love for Bruce and the DA. Perhaps not. In a sense, we may hope that Timm himself will let us know what he had hoped to imply by allowing her that speech.
I think that trying to make Barbara into a cape-climbing, unsavory, frivolous schemer is trying to redeem and ultimately overcompensating for what mostly remained a one-note, too-little unexplored and finally unmemorably tentative character, who swung from having boyish schoolgirl crushes on Batman to regularly dating Dick to having schoolgirl crushes on Bruce to falling for Batman when she began regularly working for him. I think that making her a bitter ex-lover of Bruce was probably the best thing that ever happened to her. Otherwise only Barbara/Dick fanshippers would have given much of a fig about her. Delineating character out of lacunae works in Henry James novels, but as you point out in discussing Old Wounds, in the DCAu we must sometimes put up with unfocused and muddled writing that sometimes forces the characters to follow the plot rather than their own impulses (I know that I'd rather have had Dini, Berkowitz or Goodman writing those crucial episodes, rather than Fogel and Bader). I prefer to chalk the problems in Barbara's character up to a history of mostly uncertain writing, followed by two twists meant to give controversy to an otherwise vaporous character.


It still fits b.t.'s seeming vision of the "wrongness". In fact, I'd say it fits it very well.Oh, it's wrong in many ways...mostly the wrong ones though. :p

[Alex Weitzman]

Delineating character out of lacunae works in Henry James novels, but as you point out in discussing Old Wounds, in the DCAu we must sometimes put up with unfocused and muddled writing that sometimes forces the characters to follow the plot rather than their own impulses. I prefer to chalk the problems in Barbara's character up to a history of mostly uncertain writing, followed by two twists meant to give controversy to an otherwise vaporous character.I think we're at the point of back'n'forth in regards to sheer opinion at this point. We could debate the finer details of "puppy love", but there's no further argument to make on either side that isn't mere interpretation of the comment and its history, as opposed to producing any as-of-yet unintroduced evidence. We have seen every scrap of evidence by now, and all that is left is our opinions and personal readings. Hey, that's what makes us individuals. :D

For me, personally, I attempt to go as far as I can with what seems like a logical and believable arc of a character before ultimately laying blame at the feet of the behind-the-scenes folks themselves. In fact, I believe that's what almost all of us do. The difference is in how far we feel we can go. As you can see in my Old Wounds essay, I felt I could take the logic of the situation all the way up to Barbara going into battle with Bruce, to which I could not find any sensible way to interpret it and could only see a missing line or moment which accounts for an oversight on writing or directing matters. It's not the only time I've felt that way. I think Riddler's Reform is the most insightful piece on the Riddler in the whole DCAU, but it's missing the one line that shows Batman's understanding of Nygma's problem: when Batman admonishes Nygma for not being able to stop, he also should have added, "You still have something to prove!" A line like that would have taken it out of Batman's insistence that Nygma is merely unrepentant and brought it to the heart of the conflict, that Nygma needs to prove himself smarter than Batman.

So here, with the Barbara issue, I went as far as I could and only at certain points stopped and said, "This could be explained better or made clearer." So did you; you just stopped sooner, and thusly came to the conclusion that Barbara's arc is sloppy. Without another entry in which to judge, or some other piece of evidence that has been thusly overlooked, to put it the way Westley in The Princess Bride put it, "Then we are at an impasse." Good show, old man. :)

Actually, I just thought of something, not that it'll make either of our points any further, but I figured I'd throw it out there. In Batgirl Returns, Barb shows additional proof of being a thrill-seeker when Catwoman offers in the end for them to team up. Watch Barbara's face remain alight and excited throughout Selina's description of the thrill of the hunt, picking the town clean, and all that jazz, only to deflate when Selina insults Jim Gordon. If that's Barbara's only reason for not joining Catwoman in the life of the catburglar, then what's that say about her?