starwolf_oakley: Charlie Crews vs. Faucet (Default)
[personal profile] starwolf_oakley posting in [community profile] scans_daily
I've said on this board I don't like it when superhero comics (and other forms of pop culture) make it look like mental illness is some sort of moral failing.

Three actual psychiatrists have taken issue (pun intended) with DC Comics and their description of the mentally ill, especially Batman's rogues gallery. It was originally in the New York Times.

Newsarama covered it as well.

More and four pages from THE KILLING JOKE after the cut.



"You're trying to explain a character's villainy or extreme violence by using a real-life illness, that people in the real world have, that are very common. That's when it's harmful to people in real life."

"The psychiatrists repeated several time that they don't want the beloved villains in comics to be changed, and they are fine with depictions that show bizarre behavior. But they want the references to mental illnesses to be handled more responsibly."

Most comic book villains like murdering people for their own amusement. It is hard to describe the behavior of in "genuine" psychiatry terms.

There was praise for how Geoff Johns wrote Starman, who had schizophrenia, in JUSTICE SOCIETY OF AMERICA.

Here are four pages from BATMAN: THE KILLING JOKE. While the Joker wanted to prove a point about mental illness to Batman (one bad day will drive the sanest person mad) I don't think Alan Moore was trying to write an examination of mental illness. If Moore ever did examine mental illness in a graphic novel, it would be something. (WATCHMEN touched on mental illness, but it wasn't the theme of the story.)









I recall someone once saying THE KILLING JOKE would have worked better as a Two-Face story. Perhaps.

Date: 2011-11-03 05:00 am (UTC)
kamino_neko: Tedd from El Goonish Shive. Drawn by Dan Shive, coloured by Kamino Neko. (Default)
From: [personal profile] kamino_neko
If only mis-identifying and mis-characterizing mental illnesses was the worst the bat-books did in that regard.

No, the worst is the fact that Dr Arkham's genuine desire to actually help his patients become functional (including treating them and referring to them as patients, not prisoners) was, even before he was shown to be psychotic (hallucinating 3 whole patients), and suffering from DID (where the secondary persona was a violent, manipulative psychopath), meant he was as dangerous as anyone in the asylum.

Date: 2011-11-03 02:02 pm (UTC)
thehefner: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thehefner
Speaking as someone who loves the Batman villains (especially the mentally ill ones) even more than the heroes, I just wish there's be some sense of consistency in the way their personalities and illnesses are handled. Sometimes I think the only way to salvage the mess would be to blame the quack doctor as Arkham for using a rotating series of unethical/unorthodox therapies and medications that only end up making the illnesses worse.

That said, I too miss Jeremiah Arkham as he was. The change to Black Mask was just too inexplicable, especially since Tony Daniel and David Hine both seemed to have completely separate ideas about HOW it happened (was Jeremiah a pawn of the Ministry and especially Fright, or was he a pawn of Hugo Strange and himself conspiring with Alyce Sinner? HAHA YOU GET NO ANSWERS BECAUSE EDITORIAL DOESN'T CARE), and it ruined Jeremiah as a character in a way that may never be reversible. Even if he's rehabilitated, writers won't be able to resist the looooooming specter of Black Mask, or some shit.

Date: 2011-11-03 06:55 pm (UTC)
biod: Cute Galactus (Default)
From: [personal profile] biod
Why have a reboot, if not to fix stupid things like this? We might be pleasantly surprised just yet.

Date: 2011-11-03 07:01 pm (UTC)
thehefner: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thehefner
Indeed... if only we didn't see Jeremiah Arkham as Black Mask in the first bloody issue of Snyder and Capullo's Batman, thus meaning that it's all still in canon post-reboot.

But at least the old Ventriloquist and Clock Kings are back. So that's something, I guess.

Date: 2011-11-03 08:38 pm (UTC)
kamino_neko: Tedd from El Goonish Shive. Drawn by Dan Shive, coloured by Kamino Neko. (Default)
From: [personal profile] kamino_neko
Jeremiah Arkham as Black Mask in the first bloody issue of Snyder and Capullo's Batman

Not so much, actually. We saw a Black Mask. But no mention of who he is when he's not masked (or made up, in this case). And Arkham qua Arkham has show up in Detective, as head of the Asylum. Issues 1 and 2 - issue 1, refusing to hand Joker over to be placed in a real prison, because he is a patient in the Asylum, and issue 2, being berated by Gordon because his security...isn't as secure as it ought have been, and Joker got his face cut off.

Date: 2011-11-03 08:41 pm (UTC)
thehefner: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thehefner
Unless he's an all-new character, he either HAS to be Jeremiah (and the glasses and general frame indicate as much), or else Roman never got his face burned in the DCnU, in which case I have no idea what the hell his origin is supposed to be anymore.

Doesn't Detective take place five years in the past, around the same time frame as JLA?

Date: 2011-11-03 09:10 pm (UTC)
mrstatham: (Default)
From: [personal profile] mrstatham
I don't think anyone's particularly sure where Detective fits. DC have only said Action and JL take place in the past, and I'm fairly certain they've denied that Detective does too.

So I think it's a no to being in the past, and someone just needs to send Tony Daniel and his editor a memo.

Date: 2011-11-03 09:12 pm (UTC)
kamino_neko: Tedd from El Goonish Shive. Drawn by Dan Shive, coloured by Kamino Neko. (Default)
From: [personal profile] kamino_neko
No, only Action and JL were announced as set in the past. And their solicits mention that, at least obliquely, even with the latest issues - eg: Superman is Metropolis's 'new saviour', the League are 'the not yet world's greatest heroes'.

Which is a bit of an unsatisfying bit of evidence to be sure, but, Detective's a bit standalone, so it's hard to point to anything actually within the text to demonstrate that. However, Batman being publicly active is a significant part, and in JLA everyone thinks he's just a story, which is incompatible with the idea that the mayor's gunning for him as part of his re-election bid.

Date: 2011-11-04 11:05 am (UTC)
mrstatham: (Default)
From: [personal profile] mrstatham
I think the thing that's gotten people wondering is Daniel's own comments on the matter - I'm fairly certain he's claimed it's a 'past' book, and not only that, there was a segment in the first issue that claims that when Batman captures the Joker, it's the first time he's done it, and it's taken him six years, apparently?

If that's right (can someone clarify that?), that either makes Batman spectacularly inept, or it means Detective is set somewhere around the end of the 'five year period' DC have suggested Batman was operating for before joining the Justice League.

Profile

scans_daily: (Default)
Scans Daily

Extras

Founded by girl geeks and members of the slash fandom, [community profile] scans_daily strives to provide an atmosphere which is LGBTQ-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist, woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free.

Bottom line: If slash, feminism or anti-oppressive practice makes you react negatively, [community profile] scans_daily is probably not for you.

Please read the community ethos and rules before posting or commenting.

June 2025

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930     

Most Popular Tags