Why Won't Batman Kill The Joker? Part 1 of 2

[espanolbot]

Explanations and Commentary

A common arguement that I've seen circling the internet these days is whether Gotham City would be a etter place if Batman were to just up and murder the Joker for all of the horrible things that he's done, not just to the people of Gotham, but to Bruce and his loved ones, over the years.




Rather than just dismiss this to the same mental recycling bin as the "Superman can beat any other superhero in a fight by killing them" debate, I thought that I should display a number of different reasons why Batman hasn't up and murdered Mr Jay yet. Feel free to diagree, this is up for discussion.

1. The Joker's too popular to die (both in and out of universe)
Way back when the Joker was first created in the 1940s, the creators initially attempted to kill the Joker off numerous times, but kept having to bring him back due to the character's popularity. This ranged from him being revived from his own legitimate execution by mob doctors, and using the fact that he was legally dead for a while to escape further prosecution, to just straight up survive accidentally stabbing himself. Though in the latter case, Batman had his own plans to ensure the Joker wouldn't get up to more mischief.



But even in the continuities where the Joker was actually able to kick the bucket, the Joker's campaign of destruction never seems to end with him. The Joker twisted charisma means that if he were to die, SOMEBODY would feel obligated to continue his work. Be it Harley Quinn and her gang in the Arkham City supplimentary materials and expansion packs...



...Or the international anti-establishment criminal organisation the Jokerz, as seen in both the Batman Beyond tv show and comics.



So in one way, the Joker can't die due to the fact that he's felt an indelible mark on the world, so even in the cases where he PHYSICALLY dies the very fact he existed will cause others to suffer.

2. the Joker has some kind of wonky immortal going on (in-verse)
As previously stated, the Joker in his near 75 year history has NEARLY died dozens if not hundreds of times. These ranged from falling off of stuff...


...getting run over by trains...


...accidentally stabbing himself...


...or just flat out just getting shot.


More here,
http://randompanels.blogspot.co.uk/2006/10/many-deaths-of-joker-part-1.html#links

In a lot of respects, the Joker's out of universe popularity means that he keeps NEARLY dying in horrific ways quite frequently, and surviving what would otherwise be definitely lethal accidents. Such as being trapped on an exploding plane that's crashing into the ocean while a bunch of his explosives are rolling towards him, like in the first DCAU Superman/Batman crossover World's Finest.

It's not that the universe isn't sticking him in potentially deadly situations, or even Batman is willing to just NOT save him every time, it's just the Joker is freakishly good and just not dying at this point. Could be argued that this started with him falling into that acid vat and just grew from there, I guess.

3. Batman is unwilling to let the Joker die "unjustly"
A reoccuring thing throughout the various versions of Batman is his dedication to justice, and his unforcement of the One Rule: No Killing. However, unlike Cassandra Cain (whose dedication to not killing lead her to spring a convicted murderer from a gas chamber just before he was due to be executed... it was the anniversary of her first murder, and she wasn't willing to make exceptions), Bruce's dedication to the One Rule often comes with two additional clauses.

A) If someone is executed, it has to be by an authority he recognises for something that they actually DID. So if the Joker was actually convicted to death row, and Batman was convinced that beyond reasonable doubt the Joker was actually responsible, he would allow him to be executed by the state. If there is reasonable doubt as to the Joker's guilt, Batman won't stop until the correct perp is found and punished, as someone being unjustly executed (yes, even the Joker) is just something he can't process mentally.



B) Additionally, Batman's belief that the only authority that has the right to execute criminals should be the state leads to him getting into conflict with both the Punisher (via a crossover),



...the Spectre, citing his own religious views and the Joker's mental illness as to why he can't be smote...



...Or even Superman, as seen in the Gods Among Us comic and game. The point being that if Gotham ever got its act together, they could probably have rid themselves of the Joker years ago if they wanted to, but can't due to the Joker either employing thugs to threaten jury members (Devil's Advocate) or just using all the money he's stolen over the years to hire the best possible lawyers in order to warp the law Batman loves so much until he fits the definition of being legally insane (War Crimes).

Part 2 Coming Up Later

Comments

[cainofdreaming]

2. the Joker has some kind of wonky immortal going on (in-verse)

Neron is probably investing a good portion of his power for that. Like they need the competition down under.

[espanolbot]

Even in Streets of Gotham, a gangster called Little Italy is talking to Hush about possibly taking a hit out on the Joker once they're done with their scheme to kill Batman and Bruce Wayne (Hush is exasperated that he's the only one who knows they're the same person), but even LI admits that trying to kill the Joker is near impossible because he "lives a charmed life".

Not literally of course, but the fact that he's extraordinarily hard to kill is even common knowledge amongst those who aren't part of the Supercrime set.

[beyondthefringe]

Batman's earliest plan there is straight out of Doc Savage, who was prone to performing medical procedures on his villains to cure them of being evil. But then again, Early Batman was a mishmash of assorted pulp vigilantes until he developed his own unique identity over the first few years.

I've long held my own personal belief that the universe itself refuses to let the Joker die. In fact, the Joker is something of a necessary cog, a manifestation, an idea more than a singular person. He's the DC Universe's version of a safety valve, designed to bleed off, for lack of a better word, insanity. The Joker exists so that the mass subconscious of the civilian populace can cope with a world where superhumans duke it out constantly, where entire cities or countries are destroyed on a regular basis, where gods walk the streets and aliens invade, where costumed criminals go on weird crime sprees and where reality gets unmade and remade every few years.

The Joker represents mankind's ability to cope with things out of their control. And every time he dies, vanishes, is permanently incapacitated, or what-have-you, the universe either heals up, or just creates a new Joker (possibly a Joker persona that takes up existing bodies and reshapes them.)

Much as James Robinson explained the ever-changing nature of Solomon Grundy in Starman, sio does the Joker change with his manifestations, possibly reflecting some deeper, darker undercurrent. That's how he can be a spree killer, the Clown Prince of Crime, the guy who wears his face like a mask...and so on. That's why he's never down for long...there's always a need for him. (And quite possibly, he's grown to the point where he actually creates the need for his existence, like a runaway meme... just like the Corinthian escaped Dream for all those years.)

On a lesser note, the Creeper also fits this theory. And maybe Shade, the Changing Man, Ambush Bug, The Heckler, and the Odd Man.. Perhaps they're all accidental agents of Delirium!

The Marvel Universe gets by with Slapstick, Madcap, and the Impossible Man. I rest my case.

[icon_uk]

Grant Morrison actually introduced the concept, in "Arkham Asylum" that the Joker has an infinitely mutable personality within the limits of his insantiy, and suggested it was actually a new form of "supersanity" designed to cope with the hectic modern day world.

Some days he wakes up and he's a spree killer, sometimes he wakes up and he's more into harmlessly weird practical jokes, and even he can't control which he becomes.

Chuck Dixon also suggested (and Morrison used it too for a while) that the Joker started out as a more whimsical criminal but something unspecified happened to him as the murderous obsession with Batman really took hold, and the "jokes" started to get more lethal and the bodycount rose, it became less about crimes and more about killing Batman and his allies.

[espanolbot]

That's sort of implied in Gotham Sirens as well, where there WAS a time at least where the Joker stopped being out and out murderous and became more... er, whimiscal in his crimes, even hiring a little person called Gaggy to be his henchman as he pulled off a series of pranks on Batman and Gotham.

...And then the switch flipped in the Joker's head again and he murdered a guy with a lunchtray for no reason, to Gaggy's horror.

Gaggy blamed Harley for the Joker's change in mood and tone, but really I think it's more due to the Joker just getting bored at playing the "game" one way, so he thought he'd try another. Like playing GTA V in a manner that minimalises casualities and risks in one session and just going on a rampage in another.

[icon_uk]

That's a hark back to an earlier Silver Age story in Batman 186, which introduced Gaggy as the Joker's sidekick.

[md84]

The story "Joker" also had the main character Johnny believe in his dying moments that the Joker represented a disease as old as mankind with no cure.

And in "Death of the Family" Bruce outright claimed that he honestly believed killing Joker wouldn't make Gotham a better place because Gotham itself would simply bring him back or send something worse to fill the void. Gotham itself is the real problem, and Joker is just one symptom of that.

[an_idol_mind]

And in "Death of the Family" Bruce outright claimed that he honestly believed killing Joker wouldn't make Gotham a better place because Gotham itself would simply bring him back or send something worse to fill the void. Gotham itself is the real problem, and Joker is just one symptom of that.

I find that to be disingenuous on Batman's part for the simple reason that the Joker can't get much worse. He has literally killed thousands of people, and adds dozens if not hundreds more to his body count every time he escapes from Arkham. Short of somebody blowing up Gotham, there isn't much a killer can do to top the Joker.

[benuben]

Only one hundred something. I don't remember the exact number but they stated it in Detective Comics 1.

[lego_joker]

Pfft. Ra's al-Ghul topped Joker with the events of "Contagion" alone. Throw in "Legacy", plus the bits of his backstory shown in "Death and the Maidens" and "Birth of the Demon"...

[full_metal_ox]

In short, the Joker is the Anthropomorphic Personification of criminal insanity?

[glprime]

I'd say all the best points have already been raised and summarized here, I'm just irritated at how inconsistent this character is (because of the different aims of the authors), how real-world popularity is affecting in-universe longevity and that it cheapens so much of his absurd body count because there's hardly any retribution for it.

To me, the Joker is just being used for torture porn elements, with each new writer saying, "here's what I think a psycho serial killer is thinking about."

[benuben]

I like Grant Morrison's explanation, that the Joker keeps reinventing himself. And I'm almost sure it is never gonna be used again.

[lego_joker]

Define "use" here - isn't the very fact that each writer (supposedly) has his or her own "stamp" on the character proof of that explanation? Would there be any point in bringing it back up explicitly?

[benuben]

When a writer gives an explanation for inconsistent writing and then you continue to write inconsistently without ever mentioning explanation then no I don't think that you are proving anything. Especially since this isn't old DCU anymore so unless they establish it, there is no reason to believe it exists in the new universe.

[arilou_skiff]

How do we know the Joker hasn't died already? That it's the sameman under the facepaint?

[benuben]

Because he doesn't use facepaint.

[freezer]

I'm just wondering why The Spectre didn't just do what Gods Among Us!Superman did: Brush Batman aside and get to smiting.

Frankly, there's not enough "Oh, Fuck You" in the universe to properly respond to trying toframe The Joker as "an innocent."

[flint_marko]

[coldfury]

Forget the Joker, someone fix Batman's leg!!

[donnblake]

Clearly, that's not Batman, it's a Bat-Satyr. From that much maligned and little remembered event where Superman realized that his identity protecting robots were subject to malfunction and tried to replace them all with mythological creatures.

[yvonmukluk]

Nananananananana BAT-TORGO!

[grazzt]

Bonus points if you sing the "Nananana"s to the tune of the "Haunting Torgo Theme".

[lego_joker]

I wonder... what would Bruce's reaction be to Gotham City issuing a law saying "having green hair is now an offense punishable by death"?

[donnblake]

Well, A) it would probably be judged unconstitutional, as a violation of First Amendment Rights regarding Freedom of Expression. B) I'm less sure on this, but I feel like death penalty is a state issue, at the narrowest, and individual cities cannot pass laws requiring capital punishment. C) The Joker would be just as likely to get off on the grounds of insanity, except that they might make him dye his hair at Arkham.

[benuben]

Better question: Why don't the authorities kill the Joker?

I feel more and more that the reboot was nothing but a cheap gimmick to get new readers and as such it was very half-assed. Nobody cared about reconstruction of their universe and franchises, nobody bothered to deal with long running problems of their stories, like the bullshit insanity excuse.

[espanolbot]

It WAS just a gimmick to get in new readers though.

[benuben]

But it could have been much more. I mean, they won't have this opportunity until the next reboot.

[q99]

-
But even in the continuities where the Joker was actually able to kick the bucket, the Joker's campaign of destruction never seems to end with him. The Joker twisted charisma means that if he were to die, SOMEBODY would feel obligated to continue his work. -

Frankly, the knock-offs tend to be way more manageable.

Though I do much prefer 'someone taking up his work' rather than 'unkillable immortal.'

[blunderbuss]

This is my greatest pet-peeve in comics, so let's roll. *cracks knuckles*

1. Every single time this topic comes up, it usually boils down to this. And honestly, I get it. The Joker is a very popular villain that works as an excellent arch-nemesis to Batman, so I can totally understand why they keep him around.

The problem is it's just not a good enough excuse.

You can't have heroes win just because they're The Hero and you can't have villains always escape to do evil another day just because they're The Villain. It has to make sense within the narrative of the story or the story just doesn't work. And DC simply just goddamn can't justify Joker's existence in the DC Universe. If they want to keep the Joker alive to sell more comics, then that's what they need to do.

But I do love the idea that people will take up the Joker's mantle. I don't mind the idea of the Joker making a massive cultural impact in the DC Universe. I just mind the fact that he's caused so much damage and yet not one citizen hasn't put a bullet through his skull.

2. I don't mind the idea of the Joker always surviving crazy bullshit that should have killed him. That's almost a part of his charm. But we're not talking about things that should have killed him, we're talking about why someone hasn't earnestly tried to snap his neck or blow his brains out.

Now, if people kept trying and he kept surviving anyway so people just gave up, I'd still call that sketchy but at least there'd be a reason.

3. If Batman was a cop who earnestly believed in the law and did everything to uphold it, then that'd be easier to swallow. But here's the thing; Batman is a vigilante. The very act of doing so proves that he admits that he has no faith in the government's authority and that justice must be served beyond the system. He can't appeal to authority and law if he breaks it every damn night by commiting tresspassing, assault, hacking, dangerous driving, possessing illegal ordinance, etc, etc, etc. Therefore it makes no sense that a vigilante believes that only the law that he disobeys has the authority to kill people.

[md84]

The first two points make perfect sense. As for the third, it's precisely because Batman is already technically a criminal that he refuses to kill. It's the one line he won't cross. He seems to believe that if he does deliberately kill people or leave them to die (some versions of Batman are more flexible on this point) for whatever reason, he won't be any better than the guy who shot his parents. That's total bull of course, but it's the reason why Bruce settles for repeatedly beating the crap out of his enemies instead of killing them.