Batgirl #46-47

[informationgeek]

Yeah I’m really conscious of that, we do have these overarching plots we have to serve, but Cameron and I are conscious of new readers coming in at any point, and making this series and the other two series I’m writing, Gotham Academy and Black Canary, not feel bogged down by the long histories of the characterizes, by all these decades worth of stories that came before. I never want to discount any of that or make it seem like those points of continuity never took place. But I just think each issue needs to feel like a fresh place for a new reader to start, that they can come in and get something out of it. - Brenden Fletcher

"I would argue that the people that enjoy this don't know the real Barbara Gordon at all. They like this because they don't know any better. She has been around since 1967. That is 49 years. This current run is a blip of her total history. Stewart's run accounts for about 2% of her accumulated existence. When I evaluate her, I evaluate her against herself. His run is absolutely not a fair representation of the character by any means.

Maybe this is a Batgirl that certain people can relate to, but is it really the kind of Batgirl we want them looking up to and emulating.

A lot of these characters are more real to me than people I know in reality. Batgirl is like my sister for crying out loud. And right now, Stewart is telling lies about her. You think I'm just going to stand by and watch somebody badmouth my sister. I protect my own. Since Batgirl is a fictional character, she can't defend herself. She needs people like you and me to defend her. If you really had her back, like your name implies, you wouldn't be defending this."- Brandon Mulholand, reviewer for Batman-News

Writer: Cameron Stewart& Brenden Fletcher
Artist: Babs Tarr for #46 and Eleonora Carlini & Moritat for #47
Colorist: Serge Lapointe



We start with #46...



Later...









Then over to #47...









Then there's a big scene where Babs and Steph break into the police station and try to locate some information. I'm skipping that and getting straight to the point at the end since that's where the plot important stuff happens.

Comments

Genuinely creepy villain

[7dialsmystery]

Poor, babs.

[roguezombie]

Okay, I definitely feel like the person from Batman-News sounds like their over-reacting a bit. But I also agree with some of what their saying. This doesn't feel like Barbara Gordon. Even in her lightest most carefree, her character has always shown maturity and substance (Batgirl: Year One or DCAU), and this characterization just completely lacks any of that.

I also find it frustrating that I feel like people have a hard time accepting any criticism of this book because "ugh not everything has to be all dark and angsty all the time".

[junipepper]

I agree with you completely, especially about people saying, "It's bright! It's cheery! Stop complaining about the quality!" But then, I am so clearly not the target audience for this book (female, life-long Batgirl fan, but just way too fucking old for this new iteration) so it probably truly doesn't matter what I think.

Is the art kind of sliding downhill in quality?

[informationgeek]

There's just a fill-in artist for this issue. The latest issue has Babs Tarr back to drawing. Probably because of #50 being a special, oversize issue if I had to guess.

[junipepper]

Ah, good to know. Thanks.

[doctor_spanky]

I don't know Barbara Gordon well enough to have anything to say about the accompanying quotes. I will say that I love her new costume design, that she was far more interesting as Oracle, and that Cassandra Cain is a superior Batgirl (especially when writers / artists are given the challenge of making her nonverbal)

Blame the powers that be that decided that Barbara Gordon was the only Batgirl in New 52

[chortles81]

Despite at least acknowledging her pre-New 52 fame as Oracle, though I wonder what you think of New 52 Cassandra considering that B&R Eternal is her sole book and still in the origin story phase.

[ebailey140]

You're showing your age. You can tell what era someone entered the fandom was when they declare Cass the best and One True Batgirl. :)

To the world outside of Scan Daily, though... Go to Tumblr, type "Batgirl" in the search, and you'll have to slog through a ton of Barbaras, and even several Stephs, before you find a Cass.

The thing about "Batgirl" for everyone outside of the folks for whom Cass was their first Batgirl is the name doesn't mean grim and gritty and broody. It means a young woman that is more fun than Bruce, and more relatable. Barbara and Steph are that. Cass is a great character, but she just isn't BATGIRL to the world outside of Scans Daily.

The current book is very relatable to Millennials who live in major cities. For them, the cast and setting are very familiar. This is the most realistic version of Gotham, ever. All major cities have at least one Burnside. But, I can see how it might be offputting to folks who loved the late 90s - early 00s Batbooks.

[jlbarnett]

this is pretty presumptuous. It's offputting to me and I didn't read 90s and 00s batbooks. In fact I'm most familair with Babs from Morrison's JLA, Steph's Batgirl book and guest appearences.

[doctor_spanky]

Oh I don't think Babs as Batgirl again is off-pudding at all, I like that she lives in the Brooklyn of Gotham (which one is supposed to be the hip borough?). And developing specific neighborhoods is always good to make Gotham feel more like a real place n stuff

Cass draws from comic-booky elements (mute kung fu prodigy ex-assassin seeking redemption), Babs draws from the lives of the people the book is written for (by?) / marketed to. While I think Oracle was a really cool aspirational character and she has an incredible arc, I can see why DC thought it was time to reboot her. Like how marketing studies are proving that doods and ladies basically split the comics market evenly so it doesn't have the appearance of being pragmatic anymore to just try to sell to teenage boys (http://www.comicsbeat.com/market-research-says-46-female-comic-fans/)

Also the art in this series is pretty cute and I like the colors. Like Gotham still has nightmare purple sky but it isn't creepy looking it's like inviting or fantasy-ish idk. Also I like the sleep paralysis monster

[torporish]

... look, I haven't read this series or been following this whole thing, so I really shouldn't comment. But my gut reaction to that quote from whats-his-name on Batman-News is an eyeroll so painfully large I can't really represent it in text form.

Writers try new things. It happens. If this stuff really is as horrifically bad as he makes it sound, it won't last and it won't stick. For the time being, though, get off your damn fanboy high-horse before you hurt yourself. ("She's like my sister." "I protect my own." Dear freaking God, dude...)

[redmagpie]

Ugh, I know right? I mean I'm not a big fan of this run but that doesn't make me a better person or a better fan than the people who are.

[lyricalswagger]

Yeah, entitled fanboys are really annoying like that.

Sheesh, it's a comic, guy. If you really want to "protect your own," get a job writing for DC.

[wizardru]

"Maybe I’m hard on this book because I love Batgirl and I love Barbara Gordon and I just want her to get off this crazy train and come home. But to be honest I don’t think I’m actually asking a lot. I can appreciate “cute” and I can appreciate “fun” and I clearly like comics with very little substance (did you see my review of Batman Europa)?"

Yeah, um....OK. I guess? It's weird to me how someone came claim how much they love Batgirl and then cite her years and years of being treated as inconsequential as evidence of her great history. I mean, Batgirl had some great moments, but let's not pretend that she was a top-billed character until decades after her introduction. Let's keep in mind that the first Batgirl to get her own series was Cass, FORTY-ONE YEARS after the character was introduced. Being a member of the ensemble cast of the occasional Batman Family special was her previous solo material (and/or backup features in the 70s/80s).

I mean, I get if you don't like this. It's very different from previous Babs. But this is hardly the first time a new team comes on a book and changes a character dramatically in hopes of winning new readers or reinvigorating a character. I guess it just seems weird to be solid comic-book-guy on this topic...do they do it for all the others, like when Batman 'died', the current bunny Batman and so on? And if not, why not? Are they afraid that this might work commercially for an audience they aren't in and then it won't be theirs anymore, that it will ossify on the character and lock this version down?

[jlbarnett]

II mean, I get if you don't like this. It's very different from previous Babs. But this is hardly the first time a new team comes on a book and changes a character dramatically in hopes of winning new readers or reinvigorating a character. I guess it just seems weird to be solid comic-book-guy on this topic...do they do it for all the others, like when Batman 'died', the current bunny Batman and so on? And if not, why not?

but that's not generally considered a good thing is it? If you're going to write someone so OOC they're like a new character why not write a new character? The writer is getting away with OOC behavior because it found an audience


Are they afraid that this might work commercially for an audience they aren't in and then it won't be theirs anymore, that it will ossify on the character and lock this version down?

Yes. I am utterly amazed this question needs to be asked. I mean I don't even do fandom stuff and it's obvious. Maybe it's from the number of books I've dropped over the years from creative changes, I don't know.

Imagine I like 100% of something I read, everything about it is perfect

Now you come along and you only like about 25% of the stuff in the story and instead of dropping it you and people that agree with you push to get things changed and suddenly you like 100% of the story and I like 25%

Plus then people start criticizing the old take and possibly you for liking.

And before you say "at least it's not cancelled" cancellation is frequently better, because at least you can complain about it being cancelled and you don't see this character you liked doing things they wouldn't do and saying things they wouldn't say.

The reasons people dislike newcomers and messing with what's established seem pretty obvious to me and they're pretty old school

[wizardru]

"but that's not generally considered a good thing is it? If you're going to write someone so OOC they're like a new character why not write a new character? The writer is getting away with OOC behavior because it found an audience"

I get that...but that happens in comics ALL THE TIME. Remember Barbara 'Boots' Gordon, Representative in Congress from Gotham City? Remember 'Plain Jane Brain' Barbara Gordon the librarian? Never mind Oracle or 'total reset of the character' Nu52 Barbara. I mean, it's happened a several times to her alone and it just seems weird to me to draw the line HERE.

And it's more the degree of commentary, for me. It's not 'this is a terrible version of a great character', it's 'she's my imaginary sister and you're messing with her'. It's a bit much, IMHO. There' s nothing wrong with disliking the take (it does nothing for me, personally). It didn't sound like 'I hate newcomers' so much as 'I've completely forgotten how often things in comics change', which struck me as weird.

[jlbarnett]

changing settings doesn't mean changing character though. I can see Oracle in Congress for example.

THis version is basically to immature for me and it seems like that's a common complaint

[ebailey140]

But what's "in character" Batman, for example? The early 1940s version? Adam West? The Bronze Age version? The 1990s animated series? The 90s-00s Batdick?

Answer: They all are, but very different takes, in different eras. And that's what we have with Barbara, now. She's a modern 21 year old protecting a modern city filled with modern young people. So, no, she's not going to be, entirely, the Batgirl of the early 80s, or the 30-something Oracle. It's simply not the 80s or 90s, any more, and a successful modern comic is going to be accessible to new, young, readers, especially female Millennials, in this case. And that's the way it SHOULD be.

Consider how big a jolt it must have been a few decades back when we went from the Cesar Romero Joker to "The Joker's Five Way Revenge."

[jlbarnett]

well, I disagree in general because I think it can drive away an audience before you're even sure you've got a new one, plus trying to make things "modern" can date a book

[ebailey140]

So, by your argument, we should never have had the Bronze Age Batman, or any versions that came after. We should have forever been locked in the Silver Age, pretending all these decades haven't passed.

But, they risked driving away the remaining Adam West fans by moving into the Bronze Age. They risked driving away the remaining Bronze Age fans with the mid-1980s reboot. These were the right things to do. Remember, the version that is your favorite displaced something earlier. Why was it OK to do it for all these decades, but not now?

Does modernization date a book? Sure. Silver Age comics look of their time. Same with Bronze Age, 80s, and 90s comics. The style you're comfortable with? It looks dated to new readers. That's just how it is.

The thing is, the book's selling better than it did before it was brought into the modern era.

[jlbarnett]

did they try to make it modern though? Or did they try to make it timeless? Remember, not every fan likes the era they started reading best.

Otherwise why would things like Showcases ever sell to modern fans?

[ebailey140]

Unless it's a story set in the past or far future, superhero comics have always been set in what was then modern times, designed to appeal to then modern readers. For example, there's the classic O'Neil & Adams run on Green Lantern. Hal's and Ollie's road trip was very much about the times the stories were published. Often, always being contemporary REALLY makes some classic comics dated, like why Reed Richards and company were in such a rush in the first Fantastic Four story. They had to get to the moon "before the commies. . 80s comics would have Reagan in the White House and characters watching new episodes of Magnum PI.

When you read most old comics stories, you can tell, really quickly, the period it was produced in. There are reasons for that.

[thosefew]

That bike just flew off the roof! ...that four panels ago was shown to have a low wall around it?

[nyadnar17]

I have a lot of sympathy for the Batman-News people. When you really identify with and click with a character especially a second/third generation character that is allowed to grow and change as you go and change, it sucks monkey balls when that character is killed off or reworked.

I would actually argue that reworked is a worse fate for that type of fan given how easy it is to come back from the dead vs shake off years of "mischaracterization"

[redmagpie]

I mean I agree in some ways? I'm a big Steph, Cass and Oracle fan, so I know the pain. But there's a difference between saying 'I don't like this' and 'you don't like this so you suck'.

[roguezombie]

I don't like it when people brush off mischaracterization with a 'don't worry. comic's always cycle back to the status quo' because that's not always true. A popular series can deeply impact a characterization.

I remember I was friends with someone who loved Boom Boom from the X-Men and they mentioned once that they hated Nextwave. I was surprised because that series is pretty universally loved. Boom Boom's personality in Nextwave was a very exaggerated take on the character that worked very well in the Nextwave universe but that's doesn't fit with the character's previous history and personality. But ever since Nextwave she is portrayed as a complete airhead.

And that's not really that uncommon. So I totally understand why people do get defensive and a little pissy if they feel like their favorite characters are being portrayed wrong because this might just be the time they completely change the character.

[pyrrhocorax]

I’m sure the older, more mature Barbara will come round again if we just wait long enough. That’s just how things are in comics, everything moves in cycles as the writers change.