Batman: Gotham Knights #8

[history79]

Comments

[owlbrigade1]

What pervert authorised that cover image, that is what I want to know. What sort of pervert is motivated to buy the comic by it too?

[thatnickguy]

It is DEFINITELY a sickening cover. No argument there.

On the other hand, unlike other "edgy" covers like the infamous Batgirl/Joker cover that DC nixed, this one is at least contextual along with this story.

Don't get me wrong. It doesn't make the cover any less icky. But at least it makes some sense, contextually. Without context? Horrible, just like the Batgirl cover.

[owlbrigade1]

Apologies for me coming across so strong with the pervert comment. On reflection I seem to be having an irritable day, and I should have dialled it back a bit. I didn't realise just how tetchy I am today until I just threw a tin opener across the kitchen because it slipped in my hand, and then I got angry at it because I had to go pick it up. Oh, these days.

Anyway, yes it is a deeply problematic cover. I know there is context inside the comic and it isn't completely detached from it, but I personally group things like covers in with other promotional materials like posters and so on in that they are supposed to be seen contextless first. I always think that if you (generic use of "you", not you personally) have to explain the context of these things for them to make sense then they have failed as promotional material as well as failing at basic decency. That is just my grumpy opinion today.

[thatnickguy]

Believe me, I COMPLETELY understand where you're coming from. Before I clicked on the break tag, I thought the same thing. Then the opening panel made me think, "Ohh. Okay, that makes sense. The cover is still all kinds of wrong."

No need to apologize at all, though. We see enough problematic covers as it is. This one is barrel fulls of problematic.

[mastermahan]

It really is. Devin Grayson inserts problematic sexuality the way Chris Claremont inserts eroticized mind control.

[zachbeacon]

I didn't get fandom's dislike of her work but then my earliest exposure to her work was Titans (which was awesome), Black Widow, Ghost Rider, and the short-lived X-Men Evolution comic (which were all varying degrees of okay).

I've heard the worst of it was in her Nightwing solo run but I've only read the tiny bit that was collected.

[icon_uk]

I'm torn on her at best.

Some of her character work is superb, and I mean really REALLY good. Her Gotham Knigts issue which is a series of vignettes about how Batman impacts various people is excellent.

Her Titans I found more or less unbearable. After a great first issue with some lovely banter, and then Nightwing telling an overprotective Superman to back off, we got Dick as a secret keeping control freak (Who clones Cyborg a new body without any certainty that Vic would agree to inhabit it, which is an ethical nightmare, and which leads to Vics liquid metal form sloshing around inside a meat puppet), and Starfire as someone who lies to her best friedns so they fight on the aggressors side in an invasion.

Oh, and if you ever want to read the closest thing to soft core pornography do try her novel "Inheritance" which features Bruce, Dick, Ollie and Roy and has things like Bruce knowing that the best way to stop Dick from running around is to loom close behind him and breath down his neck, and Ollie more or less pondering how sexy their sidekicks had been as kids. It's... awkward.

[mastermahan]

Yeah, she's not a bad writer, and a lot of the fandom criticism of her smacked of the sexism that has become more obvious these days - calling Tarantula a Mary Sue, for example, a gendered term that has lost all meaning.

On the other hand, you have stuff like icon mentioned, this story and where it goes, and the Tarantula thing. Those bits just keep popping up.

[deh_tommy]

I think that’s sort of like clickbait to get you curious as to why Batman is drugging Catwoman (like how in the Silver Age contextless scenes were used to provoke intrigue, such as Superman mocking Aquaman while the latter’s dying of thirst in the desert).

[owlbrigade1]

I think I preferred the older style of Super Dickery to this one though, at least the old strips were unintentionally funny. This style of cover is the sort that made me switch to buying my comics online rather than the brick and mortar based shops because it is just too creepy. It is real "back away slowly" type material.

[lucean]

I really dug this version of Strange and feel sorry we haven't seen him in a while, even though I admit that the long-term effectiveness of the character is always challenging.

Still, this was a pretty great continuation to Prey and the way Batman beat Strange here was really brilliant.

[captainbellman]

It is bizarre, the visual parallel between Strange's blood-soaked face and the design of this recent "Karma" character - especially considering they have the same pet theory.

[cygnia]

I was just about to say the same thing...

[thanekos]

I'm imagining Karma with a dog-eared copy of something published by Strange, now.

[captainbellman]

"No-One Loves Bat-Senpai As Much As Me, He's Mine Dammit MINE, And So Can You: A Field Study"

[icon_uk]

With a copy of "How Many Robin's Have There Bloody Well Been Anyway? A Discourse" stapled to it.

[arilou_skiff]

For a moment there (forgot which page I was on) I thought you meant Marvel-Karma and Marvel-Strange and was like "WTF"?

[icon_uk]

Oh yes, this story arc... Devin Grayson exploring the psycho-sexual issues of the Batman/NIghtwing dynamic.

I'm not sure it gets more disturbingly wrong than that cover, but the story itself has... issues.... LOTS of issues.

[atj99]

That being said, it does have the best description of Dick Grayson and what Robin brought to the Batman mythos IIRC.


Edit: Found the pages

https://ibb.co/kSdKUT
https://ibb.co/j1zR9T

[bradygirl_12]

"The Batman is a loner!"

"Are you kidding? He's got more kids than anyone in the superhero community."

[scorntx]

"Not according to this self-insert fan-fic I wrote!"

[mrwalker]

Something to top the "world's greatest detective does not realize there are three Jokers" issue...Bruce doesn't realize that's Hugo Strange until he reveals that he knows he's Batman???

[zachbeacon]

Was this presented as a first meeting? (I know he's one of Batman's oldest villains but y'know retcons and reboots and all that).

Hugo Strange strikes me as the type of baddie that's threatening exactly once.

[lego_joker]

A-nope. I believe it specifically mentions Doug Moench's "Prey" (their official post-Crisis first meeting, and IMO Moench's finest contribution to Batman).

(Interestingly enough, Moench did his own sequel to "Prey" a year prior, in a story-arc titled "Terror", but nobody at DC really acknowledged it.)

Honestly

[simsyland]

this shit is the reason i stopped reading batman comics awhile ago....