A page from Batgirl #47

[cyberghostface]

Warning for possible homophobia (just to be safe)?



Kind of funny how Joker being in love with Batman is treated as a "gotcha" given how he's been like "Yeah I am, so?" in the past. (From Catwoman #14).

Comments

[repto]

I mean, okay, if you want to call out Batman for not being able to get through the Joker's plot armor and put him away permanently, now what? Batman is a joke for not being able to deal with the Joker, even though we all know it's because we need to have the Joker for future stories? I don't really understand why writers think that they are clever for pointing out the limitations of continuing media that we should have all accepted by now.

[janegray]

This.

Lord knows I'm the biggest "Jason is right, shoot the bastard already" supporter in the universe. But we all know that will never happen because Joker is almost as much of a moneymaker as Batman. They are never going to bury their hen that lays golden eggs.

So stop drawing attention to it.

Winick did a reasonably good job at addressing it in his Red Hood saga. The bataraang in the neck took it too far and pissed me off, but overall "Batman doesn't kill Joker because he knows that he is psychologically incapable of doing anything halfway and is terrified he'll start killing on the regular if he does it once, which in Batman's specific case is actually a reasonable fear because he really does take everything up to 11" worked for me.

But every time writers bring it up, again and again and again and again, it works less and less.

Agreed

[dan_ingram]

And it's not just Batman.

Everyone who isn't Punisher gets it thrown in their face that the bad guys will simply escape and hatch some new scheme.

It's like every writer thinks they're being meta or mature in pointing it out, and it got old years ago.

[donnblake]

Sometimes I dream of a stripped-down Ultimate Batman sort of reboot which would take as a central principle of its series bible the idea that The Joker can only escape from Arkham one (1) time.

With that (and the caveat that if the Joker can only escape once, it should be considerably rarer for any crook likely to be placed in maximum security who doesn't have 'Escape Artist,' as their central gimmick), you kind of solve this whole conundrum.

Joker need not be caught immediately upon his appearance- there's room for a long string of cat-and mouse, with minor victories for either side, long-term ability to cause harm is diminished, so Batman proves effective, but it is not eliminated. He may still engage in activities within Arkham, or direct them in the wider world from his cell- both things that real-life criminals have accomplished- so you can continue to tell Joker stories. (A Harley Quinn arc would be a great example of this).

Of course, as more of Batman's foes wind up semi-permanently behind bars, this means you have to manufacture new foes for him to face- and this in turn lets you keep the moral dilemma, phrased not as "Well, it's impossible to stop the Joker from killing people," but in real world terms of deterrence, with more hard-line vigilantes arguing that the next guy is less likely to pick up a Halloween costume and a missile launcher if the last guy got a bullet in the head instead of a cell in Arkham or Blackgate.

Other core rules include: No Batsignal on GCPD HQ and No Resurrections (Except for Ras al Ghul).

[starwolf_oakley]

Kind of funny how Joker being in love with Batman is treated as a "gotcha" given how he's been like "Yeah I am, so?" in the past. (From Catwoman #14).

It depends on the delivery. Lex Luthor makes a joke about Batman liking Catwoman more (in OUTSIDERS) and the Joker goes bezerk. Showing the Joker's biggest weakness is he can't take a joke at his expense.

[beyondthefringe]

Even though sometimes, he's been depicted as appreciating the joke, even when he's the punchline.

[mazway_75]

Judd Winick played on it in an "Outsiders" issue where Joker kidnaps President Luthor, torturing him and Luthor goes "are you...are you afraid...Batman loves Catwoman more than you?"

[icon_uk]

IIRC Batman didn't let KGBeast roam free, he left him broken and paralysed in some godforsaken super-isolated chunk of tundra or something.

[kurenai_tenka]

Ah yes, another classic Bat-'not-technically-murder'.

[beyondthefringe]

Yes, yes, Joker loves Batman.
Here's my thought on that:
It's not a sexual love.
It's not a romantic love.
It's that obsessive, compulsive, all-encompassing toxic form of love that steps outside of what we consider normal love.
The Joker doesn't want to fuck Batman, or date Batman, or be with Batman. (I've never seen Joker as having any specific sexuality... to me, he refuses to play by such distinctions and boundaries, except when it functions as part of his latest shtick. If he ever slept with Harley, it was part of a role or game, not out of any sense of love or desire or attraction. He knew that's what -she- wanted, and obliged to keep her dancing on his strings, at his whim.)

Anyway... the Joker -wants- Batman because no one else is worthy of him, and that's the scary, abusive sort of love that gets people hurt, and it's magnified on a city-wide scale because well, billionaire with a batsuit and murder clown, instead of normal people.

And anyone who tries to play this off as a joke, or to try and get under the Joker's skin, doesn't get just how profound a driving force this is for the Joker.

In short, this particular take is nothing new and exciting, and the Joker shouldn't even take the bait.

[lissa_quon]

see it'd be nice if someone actually played with and wrote and addressed that sort of love. Instead of making it a "hahahahah" bit.

Like - for example Hannibal. When someone goes "hey Hannibal you are in love with Will Graham" its not a "oh hahahaha" its more weight. It's a sinking concern - cause you realize how much the story revolves around that fact.

[tcampbell1000]

I don't think there's anything homophobic about this. Seems more anti-toxic to me. It's true Joker's been gaying it up for Batman since The Dark Knight Returns if not before, but he usually frames it as a relationship of equals, assuming Batman is as obsessed with him as vice versa.

Sometimes the text has backed this theory up, especially when Batman's been a half-crazed loner, but not so much lately. Batman's moved more toward a network of stable relationships (occasional setbacks notwithstanding), and the Joker's seemed more than a little fixated on breaking those, perhaps even threatened by them, though he'd never put it in those terms.

So Barbara borrows a page from The Lego Batman Movie and maybe Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker, implying the Joker is instead more of a fanboy, stalker, or schoolboy with a crush, expending vast resources just for moments of Batman's attention. What really makes that pathetic, the argument goes, is that the Joker's also trying to maintain his mystique as an untouchable god of chaos. But to love unrequitedly is to be hurt.

(Sometimes he can split the difference between showing he cares and pretending he's uncaring by, of course, joking about his feelings: "Oh, I was starting to worry you wouldn't show up!" But one can't sustain that indefinitely. Eventually it becomes clear how much you care or don't.)

I don't doubt that the people who love Bruce see him as far beyond reciprocating the Joker's attention except for dealing with the obvious threat he represents. If Batman died, the Joker would spend the rest of his life looking for someone to fill the void he left; if the Joker died, family-man Bruce would barely give him another thought, except as a useful data point when dealing with other maniacs.

All that said, the moment doesn't entirely work for me; the laughter's too wild and forced, and the pacing's rushed. Barbara should've spent a page, not a panel, building that argument and probably shouldn't have gone for more than a low chuckle. The issue tries to cram in more Barbara-confronts-the-Joker ideas than it knows how to comfortably fit, causing these weird jumps in the flow. But the idea that the Joker is barely less delusional in love than Harley Quinn was at her lowest? That's probably worth continuing to kick around.

[cyberghostface]

if the Joker died, family-man Bruce would barely give him another thought, except as a useful data point when dealing with other maniacs.

Batman would probably be in a bit of a funk even if he didn’t want to admit. In the Arkham games he was pretty much depressed after Joker died and in Injustice Superman accuses him of missing him.

[rainspirit]

Agreed. Even after everything, there's a part of him that believes that anyone can be redeemed, even the Joker.

[chalicother]

I always thought Batman's funk was over not being able to save the Joker and the fact that he may have subconsciously let him die.

I mean at then end of the game he has no problem throwing the Joker into the deepest parts of his mind and for him to be forgotten.

He gave Ra's more respect in the game , when he decided to let him die(optional ending)

[tcampbell1000]

I'll go along with chalicother as far as the Arkham games go. I'm not an expert on those, but that seems more like an issue of Batman's general code against killing/letting people die.

Whereas if the Joker died without Batman's involvement, as he did in Injustice... yeah, I don't see Bruce playing a lot of violins in that scenario. And I sure wouldn't trust Neo-Fascist Superman's take on it, which seems like classic ad-hominem deflection.

I mean yes, Bruce wants to redeem everyone, and there's no one whose death would make him say "Well, thank goodness that's over with," but he tends to shift his attention quickly to the good he can still do. His gravestones are for his parents and (coughcoughcurrently) Alfred, and there's no plot there reserved for any villains.

[shadowpsykie]

I don’t see his behavior as guilt for not being able to save the Joker. I see it as guilt for not being able to save Clark. Maybe he feels, if I had killed him I would have saved Clark’s soul. But now all this is
My fault.

[tcampbell1000]

Yeah, he's definitely hurting a lot more for Clark's sake.

[cricharddavies]

I think Bruce would be a bit more immediately upset than you're saying, because "when you take away everything else from the Batman, what you're left with is someone who doesn't want anyone to die". But you're right that he would get over it in time.

[tcampbell1000]

True enough.

[jlbarnett]

just make Joker not human

I'd make him the same thing Solomon Grundy is, except I'd make him out of the pieces of multiple people, which is why the multiple choice past

Joker should not know this

Ideally the Bat-fam and maybe Commisioner Gordon and certain members of Gotham PD know this. It was figured out after his fingerprints were Id'd. And every finger print came from a different missing person, who were rumored to disappear around Slaughter Swamp

[lissa_quon]

That'd be a nice idea. A sort of avatar of chaos? Like Swamp Thing but more murder-y chaotic? Strike him down and he comes back - but someones else's prints attached or a different face?

[jlbarnett]

exactly. And it's a reason not to kill him. The next version could be worse