BHOC: BATMAN #316

Brevoort History of Comics

A combination of switching my shopping to the new Stationery Store and having a bit more coin in my pocket (it was during this time that I’d decided to forego school lunches, instead channeling the dollar-a-day I was given by my parents for sustenance into funds for buying more comic books) got me to finally begin to read BATMAN on a regular basis. It was still for the most part never my favorite title, and looking back on it from this vantage point, I can kind of still see why. But it contained decently-crafted super hero stories, and so while they didn’t typically knock me out of my seat, the book did represent a solid and sturdy 40 cents’ worth of entertainment each month. And among comic book readers, it was virtually a rule that you had to like Batman.

It’s kind of funny to see Robin listed on the cover as a special guest star, but that designation was well-deserved at this point in time. For pretty much all of the 1970s, the Batman and Robin team had been operating independent of one another, with Dick Grayson having gone off to college, leaving his mentor to steer a bit more sharply into his whole creature-of-the-night thing. While the Dynamic Duo remained an inseparable twosome across all other media, and certainly in the world of licensing, in the comics it was rare to see them share a story together in this manner.

The Batman stories of this period strove for a certain amount of grounded plausibility, but they somehow never really got there. There were too many outlandish villains with cartoon schemes, too much verbal bantering, too much frivolity. The book wasn’t really dark, nor was it especially grim. There was a sense that a lot of the audience was still coming to the character through reruns of the 1966 live action television series. The book was, in a way, comfort food. Len Wein, who was writing the title at this moment, was an established pro with a refined voice by this time. He was a solid craftsman who always delivered. The artwork by Irv Novick was similarly reliable. I didn’t like Irv’s Batman as much as I did his Flash–his Batman drew from the Neal Adams model, but somehow made him chunkier and stiffer and a bit less animated. There was a kind of documentary feel to Novick’s approach–he exaggerated figures for dramatic effect, of course, but he approached each story in a very straightforward manner.

The villain in this particular story was one of the more outlandish members of the Caped Crusaders’ rogue’s gallery: Crazy Quilt! He had originated as an enemy of the Boy Commandos, then in some strange way segued over to fighting Robin on the latter’s short-lived solo series in STAR-SPANGLED COMICS in the 1940s, having forgotten all about his encounters with Rip Carter and his kids. As noted above, CQ had been an illustrious painter until a gunshot wound and an experimental procedure turned his vision all wonky. Determined to share his strange affliction with others, he began a series of color-themed crimes. This is the sort of felon that the modern day Batman would effortlessly fold, spindle and mutilate. But in 1979, he still posed a legitimate challenge, enough to require both Batman and Robin to take him on.

But before we get into more of a play-by-play, here’s a house ad from the issue in question. ACTION COMICS #500 was in the offing, and I can remember the feeling of excitement as the ramp-up to it began. The book was going to be released in the Dollar Comics format, and was one of the first centennial issues to be upsized in celebration–I believe only FANTASTIC FOUR #200 had come out before it. I had no way of knowing that the story contents had initially been commissioned for a Treasury Edition that got pulled from the schedule when the fortunes of that format turned sour, but I still would have enjoyed it if I had known, I expect.

So Crazy Quilt is back, and just at the same time that Robin happens to be visiting Gotham City. The Dynamic Duo interrupt him as he stages a heist at STAR Labs, stealing experimental medical equipment, but having never faced him before, Batman is caught flat-footed by his head-mounted color rays and dazzled long enough for the crook to make his escape. It turns out that Crazy Quilt is losing his eyesight, so he’s stealing the equipment and personnel to enable a delicate operation to save his vision. He and his gang next abduct Dr. Norman Dexter, administrator of Gotham Hospital, to perform the procedure. Dexter’s developed some new techniques in optical surgery and CQ thinks he’s the man for the job.

Another break here: at the time, DC was making a concerted effort to experiment with other formats, one of which was the digest. Archie Comics had found great success with these tiny books, and so DC rolled out a regular program of two releases a month that lasted for years. I hadn’t yet seen any of the DC Digests, but my Stationery Store would begin carrying them. And ads like the one above made me aware that they existed. But in this case, I didn’t yet care about westerns, and was still lukewarm on Batman, so I wasn’t especially pulled in or searching for these.

Upon learning of Dr. Dexter’s abduction, Batman and Robin trail his kidnappers to Gotham Community Hospital, where Crazy Quilt will go under the knife on the top floor. But the place has been occupied and booby-trapped to prevent anyone from intervening, so Bruce and Dick split up, each one taking a different stairwell and racing towards the top, battling defenses human and otherwise along the way. But nothing can halt either Batman or Robin–but they are delayed for long enough that the procedure is performed and crazy Quilt’s sight restored.

But this turns out to be a temporary fix as, in the course of a battle with Batman and Robin, CQ has his own helmet-rays reflected back at him, causing his newfound sight to fail. Stricken blind, the battle is over, as is seemingly the threat caused by the color-obsessed criminal. Of course, this being comics, he was brought back again and again after this for some reason, so the punch line to this story falls a little bit historically flat. This is a good example of the kind of material that BATMAN was showcasing in the late 1970s. The stakes were fairly small, the amount of characterization largely surface, and the emphasis was on action and color and death traps and narrow escapes. Not all that dark, not all that grim, but more straight-laced than the Adam West version. And one could certainly argue that Batman and Robin are somewhat in the wrong here, preventing a sick man from keeping his vision–even if he did use criminal means in an attempt to retain it.

The issue also carried another edition of the weekly Daily Planet plug page that hyped next week’s new releases. Fred Hembeck has a groaner of a gag in his strip this time, while Answer man Bob Rozakis reveals that his column gets more mail than any individual title at the time.

Published

82 thoughts on “BHOC: BATMAN #316”

  1. Batman was never a favorite for me either and ranked lower on my list than yours. The only things I remember of Wein’s run is start of Catwoman inching closer to anti-hero. As for Novick, I know he had some technical wonks but I never didn’t enjoy his artg on a book. And yes, the Bat-Titles were less serious and Batman less dark but I’d still take this over the a$$hole Bat-God we get now. The period right before Crisis was my favorite time for the character but that Batman died when Crisis was over.

    Like

    Reply

  3. This was pretty bad. The Frank inkers, McLaughlin, Giacoia, Chiaramonte, possibly ranked in that order, didn’t hit the mark for me as much as Dick Giordano did. Irv Novick wasn’t high on my list, either. The late 1970’s B&B’s were mostly better than this. Aparo was still in his prime. The Englehart/Rogers “Detective Comics”, was good, too. But Batman got a little better with each year. Don Newton, Gene Colan, Klaus Janson, and to a lesser extent, Tom Mandrake. Moench would write some decent stuff in those years, 1982 to 1986? Looking back on this issue from ’79, about 47 years later, it’s just weak.

    Hard to believe grown men were still OK with publishing a bare legged teen kid in green underwear and booties, kiddie audience or not. It “was just the way things were.” But is a bit ridiculous. Same for the visuals the whole issue. The guy Robin’s chasing on page 1 even looks like Bruce Wayne in “casual” clothes. Everything looks interchangeable and disposable. And I guess that’s all comicbook stories were to some people back then (including gthe people producing them)

    As for the “hate” on the “Bat-God”, I didn’t really see the over-the-top Batman-beats-all until Morrisson’s JLA, and that was in 1996 or 1997. NOT right after this issue of Batman. And Morrisson only flexed Batman’s rare, peak highlight moments, into 24/7 constat, “practical invincibility” (except vs. Grant’s version of Prometheus), because (I guess) otherwise, it makes little sense for a mortal in tights and pads to hang with superhumans who fly, run faster than sound, bounce bullets, lift trucks, and manipulate energy. I mean, I personally wouldn’t even let Oliver Queen onto the JLA Satellite (or Watchtower). 😉

    Batman didn’t and doesn’t need any of that. My fave Batman stories are street level, but in which he’s compassionate, smart, brave, merciful, and has the ability to back it up. Not some humorless, psychotic brute that enjoys inflicting pain. But also not Adam West or the guy in “Superfriends” who might even get lost in Gotham City, he’s always in the Hall of Justice.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. And I’ll say this too. Morrisson’s mid-2000’s Batman run was the most consistently satisfying the character had been for me, on a regular basis in my lifetime. Except for a few dozen of issues prior to that- miniseries or annuals that actually realized the character’s potential. But it was in short spurts, often months apart. I loved “Year One” (still holds up). And then Matt Wagner’s “Faces” and “Batman/Grendel”. Some of Dixon’s stuff, then Brubaker’s and Rucka’s stuff. The all too-rare Kelly Puckett written DCU stories (The comics based on the animated cartoon show were good, too).

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    2. I think Batman can work as a League member when there’s good plotting. I’m inclined to stories where it’s not just a team of tanks blasting away, where there’s someone who is good at strategizing and knowing what’s a diversion and figuring out the fatal flaw in the villain’s plans. Of course, the problem there is making the rest of the League look stupid. But I’d argue that Batman can bring something worthwhile to the table from being The World’s Greatest Detective.
      Crazy Quilt should have been left in the Golden Age. His main “weapon” can be taken out by someone skilled with a paintball shooter, and that’s what should have been done here.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. Good points.

        Batman’s my favorite comicbook character. But I’d prefer him not in the Justice League. I did enjoy Grant Morrisson’s use of Batman in Grant’s “JLA”, but Batman doesn’t need the League. And the League can & should prove it doesn’t need Batman.

        I think J’onn J’onnz & others could provide the necessary leadership & resources. Grant had Batman tell Superman (in “JLA” # 2?) that J’onn “has a fine, tactical mind”, & “no one understands team dynamics better” than J’onn.

        J’onn’s also no slouch as a detective. Maybe not “the world’s greatest detective”, but likely good enough for the League, & proven to be open to collaborating with others.

        If it were up to me, I’d relaunch the JL with heavy hitters, that also work well as a team. Not all-stars, but a championship squad. No non powereds. With a balanced mix of abilities, & relatable personalities, all down to earth. A couple scientists. And experienced.

        The 1st 12 issues could include these 7 heroes.

        J’onn, Superman, Zatanna, Vixen, Vibe (I know, I know), Glimmer (female former Dr. Light repurposing a name Grant used for a speedster “Promethean giant”), & (some will hate this) a new , Black female successor to the name & powers of Captain Comet (passed on to her by the now deceased Captain himself in attempting to save her life out in deep soace, sacrificing himself in the process).

        And because I love using pieces of the shared universe, embodied by the League, the new Captain Comet could be a S.T.A.R. (Labs) astronaut “lost in space”, and remained out there, maybe harassing the Khunds until a League mission brought them out there, & serendipitously into contact with her. And she returned to Earth as a member in the JL.

        Year 2 could see Supes leave. And maybe some other shake ups. Maybe Wonder Woman joins. Or Vibe starts dating Halo & joins a new Outsiders team with her.

        Like

      2. Better Crazy Quilt than the Ten-Eyed Man ( Someone explain how connecting optic nerves to the sensory cells in his fingertips could ever enable him to see through them? Eyes have cornea, pupil and iris, lens, retina, rods and cones that work with the optic nerve and visual cortex — Google AI Overview ) [ Batman#226 ( November 1970 ) created by Frank Robbins and Irv Novick ].

        Liked by 1 person

    3. I wondered why Robin was chasing Bruce Wayne on the splash page. AAnd then to be told he was a teenager surprised me. I also have similar issues with Mike Grell’s Superboy and Legion of Superheroes artwork. They all look like mature adults to me and not teenagers.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. I remember being a teenager, starting in the early/mid 1980’s, reading a few then-current issues of LoSH, thinking, some of them are married, have kids, and even beards. I guess they were 5-10 years older than when they joined, and just kept the “kid/boy/girl” codenames?

        Liked by 1 person

      2. They tried to explain it by stating human lives were so much longer in the future that they were Boy and Lass longer. Like much of the stories Grell drew, it was a swing and a miss.

        Liked by 2 people

      4. I remember Duo Damsel and Bouncing Boy getting married, followed by Lighting Lad and Saturn Girl. Still, it was their more mature looks that bothered me. Maybe it was the sideburns: I’m still unable to grow luscious ones like Mike Grell seems to love drawing.

        The same goes for the uniforms: I really didn’t like the minimal uniforms with so much exposed skin. I thought they looked stupid, in part because some appeared to have no way to stay on the characters. I also thought it increased their chances of get scrapes during fights (because a thin piece of fabric will surely protect them).

        And Steve’s right (of course) that Robin was ahead of Grell, and I never thought he was under clothed. But the difference is Robin had that inappropriate costume from the get go, while the Legionnaires originally had more modest costumes.

        If I recall correctly at least Lighting Lad and Saturn Girl were eventually known as Lighting Man and Saturn Woman, al least for a time.

        The problem, of course, is that comic characters need to remain the same while also aging and growing. Some have successfully been able to move the needle, like Dick Grayson becoming a man, leaving Robin behind and becoming Nightwing (and having sex!). But even then, they get stuck, just as an adult, not a child or teenager.

        That’s why I really like DC’s Earth-2. They made the decision way back in the sixties that they would age their heroes from the 40’s and 50’s and it works (and least for me). They were allowed to marry, have children and grow old, at least before Crisis on Infinite Earths.Do you know

        Liked by 1 person

    5. [moved for threading]

      “Lad” and “Lass” aren’t that strange for someone in their 20’s, though it’s not an American word. A “lad mag(azine)” was not for children. Pre-crisis, Supergirl was still using that name even after she’d been out of college for years. Power Girl isn’t a teenager. Invisible Girl’s age is hard to pin down, but she wasn’t a teenager in FF#1 and didn’t change until after being a married woman who had a young child. Which leaves “Kid” and “Boy”. There’s “Rawhide Kid” and “Two-Gun Kid”, etc. I suppose “Boy” could be justified in-universe as something the person was so well-known as, that they didn’t want to change it even if they’d aged out of it.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  4. Novick’s work struck me as competent but generally unexciting, and I liked it better on FLASH than on BATMAN, too. But even paired with McLaughlin, who was like a third-rate Giordano, he was an improvement on John Calnan and others who’d been drawing BATMAN. I liked Len’s work on BATMAN, though what I think I liked most about it was the subplots, while the actual villain-of-the-moment plots were hit or miss. It may have had something to do with the art — the Clayface two-parter he did with Marshall Rogers in ‘TEC was excellent, but later stories drawn by lesser artists didn’t have the same zing. I wonder if Len just wasn’t as inspired. Going from Perez and Simonson and Andru to Novick and Swan must have felt like turning the volume down…a lot.

    It really seemed like Julie Schwartz hadn’t been inspired, since his two star writers of the time had both been brought in by Jenette. And Paul Levitz, coming on board as editor, didn’t change the creative team any. Though he did tell Len that if he kept turning his work in late, he’d have to fire him — and Len continued to be late and was replaced by Marv Wolfman.

    This story isn’t helped by Crazy Quilt looking so lame. He’s meant to be garish, but still, that helmet could have been redesigned, or something.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  5. The 1966 Batman TV series turned me off Batman. Stories like Batman Year One Part 1 to 4 [ Batman#404-407 ( February-May 1987 ) ] , Ten Nights of the Beast Part 1 to 4 [ Batman#417 -420( March-June 1988 ) KGBeast ], The Many Deaths of the Batman Part 1 to 3 [ Batman#433-435 ( May-July 1989 ) ], Batman Year 3 Part 1 to 4 [ Batman#436-439 ( Early August-Late September 1989 ) ], A Lonely Place of Dying Part 1 to 5 [ Batman#440-442 ( October-December 1989 ) and The New Titans#60-61( November-December 1989 ) ], Batman Year Two part 1 to [ Detective Comics#575-578 ( June-September 1987 ) ] and When the Earth Dies! Chapter One to Three [ Batman#445-447 ( March-May 1990 ) NKVDemon ] changed my mind about the character.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. According his Wikipedia, Crazy-Quilt that the Boy Commandos fought was called Mr. Quilt [ Boy Commandos #15 ( May-June 1946 ) created by Joe Simon and Jack Kirby and first encountered Robin in Star Spangled Comics#123 ( December 1951 )]. the first Paul Dekker incarnation of Crazy Quilt appeared in Blackhawk#180 ( January 1963 ) and was created by artist Dick Dillin and an uncredited writer and Paul Dekker II ( Crazy Quilt ) appeared in Detective Comics#566 ( September 1986 ) by Doug Moench and Gene Colan.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  6. I also saved my lunch money, in this case .75. This does nothing for me and glad I was spared this one. Having said this, I still bought my share of underwhelmers. How can so many comics be hitting the stand — yeah I would have preferred the fish.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  7. Years ago, someone said to that we like Batman because we can never be Superman, but we could be Batman. As this person did not collect comics, that statement made perfect sense. Sure, most of us lack the resources of a billionaire and so on. Still, in theory, that a normal man could prevail against the plethora of horrid menaces arrayed against the dreariest city in existence certainly has a strong appeal. Likewise, that this same individual can stand tall besides virtual gods in the Justice League is equally compelling. Writers like Morrison wisely tapped into that aspect, pushing Batman’s popularity to the heights it enjoys now.

    But that doesn’t have much to do with this rather dismal comic book. Using a villain that even the Super Friends would have likely considered too silly doesn’t help. Len Wein’s writing does what it’s supposed to do. As do both Novick and McLaughlin with the art. Nothing inspired and several Bat signals from exciting. Still, a readable story that I strongly suspect was intended for somewhat younger readers.

    I didn’t worry about saving lunch money since our high school didn’t have a cafeteria which meant a bologna sandwich, bag of chips with an apple five days a week. But if we’d had one, I can’t imagine forgoing sustenance for this comic.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. While I understood that I could not come from Krypton, I nevertheless considered it just as far out of reach to have trained my body to physical perfection and the ability to swing around from the building tops.

      Easier to picture the idea that I might be a mutant who discovers his powers as a teenager, or that I might be in some odd scientific accident and get powers that way.

      But Batman? Way too much work, and I’d need to have started years earlier.

      I still enjoyed reading his adventures, though.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      1. Way too often Batman is written as if he is a super-powered being anyway. Writers give him inhuman endurance and speed. The ability to create in oneself an emergency backup personality is not just training yourself extensively.

        Liked by 3 people

      3. @Steve who is always right (so why am I bothering to dispute him?) 😉 Batman’s damaged and driven from losing his parents. A form of PTSD. He’s a good, decent guy, but a little delusional. I mean, he dresses up much like a big bat.

        But he wants to save people from the terrible tragedy that happened to him.

        It’s IMPROBABLE he’d have the smarts, AND the physicality, AND the finances, AND the will to be altruistic rather than be a resentful villain (like Mike W. Barr & Michael Golden’s the Wrath in “The Player on the Other Side” story).

        But not 100% IMPOSSIBLE. More like 99%. 🤣

        Liked by 1 person

    2. I think I remember Grant Morrisson’s reasoning on “emphasizing” (my word choice) Batman’s honed human skills and abilities to peak levels by thinking of him as an “ultimate human”. Not the only one, but one of them. Without unnatural enhancements.

      An Olympic level athlete, which was already established in 1985′ “Who’s Who”, if not many years earlier).

      A brilliant IQ, if not genius level (which would be unnecessary & just overkill, & boring, the way it would be if Superman was practically omnipotent).

      Grant said something in a late 1990’s interview with Wizard Magazine like, “humans’ greatest talent is problem solving, so as a peak human, he’d be one of the best.” .The other members maybe let those specific skills get softer by relying on their physical powers (remember we’re talking Wally West & a still-learning Kyle Rayner in their roles, not science guy Barry Allen and experienced test pilot Hal Jordan).

      Grant mentioned that at times the other member would turn to Batman and ask him what they should do. That lessens those heroes. J’onn and Diana, and Kal/Clark, are no dummies. Which why I typed earlier, Batman doesn’t need the League. And that the League shouldn’t need him.

      The business reality is that DC sales often need Batman in the League…

      Personally, I prefer Batman when he’s not “functionally invincible”. In the early 1990’s he lost in a fight to Deathstroke (in Deathstroke’s own series, of course), which made sense because Slade is a superhuman (low level, but still, no physical fatigue, constantly peak or even enhanced physicality, his debated mental “capacity”).

      Batman was also beaten by Lady Shiva. The Bronze Riger ( mid 1970’s?). Blockbuster. Croc. And of course, Bane. There’s got to be risk or the stories get boring. And we admire Batman for facing greater odds & worry about him.

      He’s still the coolest.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      2. Batman as the team leader and strategist never made a lick of sense. He’s the product of his training and it’s obvious “team leadership” isn’t anything he’d have thought to prepare for. More likely he’d be the lone wolf who screws up the rest of the team — which of course is what happens in Tower of Babel.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. I dunno. Maybe it’s something he wouldn’t have expected to do at first, but he pretty early on became the mentor of a young assistant, and had Alfred to boss around, too.

        I could see him being the uncooperative disruptor early on, but over the years of being a League member he’d figure out that he could be more effective as a leader, and adapt.

        And then he’d still take off and do his own thing when he found it appropriate…

        Liked by 1 person

      5. @Kurt Busiek, astute observation, rings very true to the character to me. I’m disappointed that outside of your brief JLA run, I wasn’t able to read a Batman run by you.

        Like

      6. For most of my career, I would have told you that I wouldn’t know what to do if I was writing an ongoing Batman series; didn’t have the ideas. Batgirl and Robin, sure. World’s Finest, I could make it work. But solo Batman, I didn’t have a clue.

        It’s only fairly recently that I’ve figured out things I’d want to do with a Batman series, and I expect it might not be commercial today. So I’ll need a time machine, I think. Or a dynamite artist and a not-quite continuity setting…

        Liked by 1 person

      7. @Kurt Busiek. Dang nabbit. I feel cheated. 😉 I wish I could’ve had the chance to see those realized. I’m sure many different artists would’ve liked to have drawn your Batman stories.

        Like

      10. [moved for threading]
        Tim Pervious – The claim was “we like Batman because” (global explanation), not “I like Batman because” (expression of personal taste). One can’t fairly argue people’s taste, but an explanation as to why a character is very popular is fair game for analysis. And pointing out that an explanation doesn’t seem to hold up when compared to Batman’s pulp inspirations. Sherlock Holmes isn’t popular because we could be him either.

        Liked by 1 person

      11. @Seth Finkelstein, so? 🤣🙏I think I did address Rick’s point, and then delved into Grant’s publicly stated (30 years ago?) justification for including Batman on the JLA and in the prominent (and flattering ) manner in which he included him.

        I’m not asking or expecting you to “account” for my “taste”. And I’m not interested in staying within any lanes of debate painted by another guest here (as I’m just a guest, as well) except that we be respectful and treat each other that way.

        I think your opinions are as valid as mine. And you’ve shown a lot of knowledge behind them. I can’t and wouldn’t put any restrictions on them. Just as I don’t accept any on mine. As long as I express them to others respectfully. 🙏🙏🙏🙏

        Like

    3. The idea of “we could be Batman” strikes me as lazy punditry that’s just been rpeated forever. I don’t think that’s a part of the appeal at all. Rather, Superman and Batman and are two different veins of the adventure genre, the superhuman SF character vs the peak-human street-level character. Batman was very much inspired by the pulp crime fighters, notably The Shadow, who were hugely popular at the time. Nobody ever said “we liked The Shadow because we could be him”.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. The comment stood out to me because it came from someone whose exposure to both characters was limited to television and movies. Whether she picked up it from somewhere else or not didn’t matter. I saw it as a simple summation of Batman’s popularity. Another way of looking at it is in many ways, we would like to be Batman. Or rather, Bruce Wayne. That we had the determination to push our bodies and intellect to their limits is appealing. (Being a competitive runner, I know realistically that our bodies do have limits and we often pay a price for exceeding them.) Nor does the idea of wealth hurt that concept. Of course, that Bruce Wayne has devoted his life to such acts also speaks of a broken – even tortured – psyche. But comic book mythology requires a suspension of belief to varying degrees. We work that to fully enjoy the stories.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. It’s funny but as a kid I thought “I could be Batman” was a minus. Who wants someone I might conceivably be? Much cooler to have someone outside my reach like Flash or Green Lantern.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Well, people can like Batman for whatever reason they feel like. Someone else telling them that their reason for liking Batman seems like bullsh!t, or batsh!t to me. 😉

        Liked by 1 person

      4. Between Crisis and Editor O’Neil, I haven’t enjoyed Batman for decades. Instead of going after people who do like it I just ignore it all and occasionally mention I haven’t liked Batman since Crisis and Editor O’Neil. I agree that arguing taste is a waste.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. @Rick Moore it makes sense to me to like, admire, or respect the idea of someone pushing themselves to do what Batman does; not just for the sheer drive, dedication, & determination it takes. But also for the positive impact he has on others in his stories. And for his reasons, motivations, for doing it. And I couldn’t care less if anyone else didn’t understand why I’d admire, respect him for wanting to do good because (or in spite) of the tragedy he endured. I’m just very glad the best of those stories exist. And that I’ve been able to enjoy so many of them. I’m with ya, Rick.

        Liked by 1 person

      6. @the Steve who’s ALWAYS Right. 😉. Did you like “Batman: Year One” at all? Not gonna judge you, just wanted to clarify.

        Mike W. Barr, Alan Grant, even Jim Starlin, wrote Batman post-“CoIE”. Yet the tone of many of their stories wouldn’t have felt out of place with many published before “CoIE”.

        Some stories in the anthological “Legends of the Dark Knight” broke with the “post-CoIE” approach to Be Batman.

        Like

      7. Miller’s writing was losing its appeal to me by the end of his Daredevil run (the fall of Matt Murdock was a blip upwards) and his art started turning me off with the Dark Knight returns. I can picture Year One’s art vaguely but could tell you nothing about the story from memory.

        Liked by 1 person

      8. @Steve who’s always right, “Batman: Year One” was drawn by the great David Mazzucchelli. Maybe initially appearing as understated or “conservative” in detail, I think the art’s sublime and masterful.

        Everything essential is there. Storytelling is spot on. Figures and faces are naturalistic, believable, and all in service of the story, while still being amazing, fundamentally.

        Liked by 1 person

  8. I must be the rare guy who liked Novick on Batman more than I did on The Flash. The first Batman comic I bought was #259 with some really nice Giordano inks on Novick and that made him ‘my’ Batman artist until I discovered Jim Aparo.

    I thought Novick, like Curt Swan, was not really suited for fantastic or science fiictiony things, but stories about regular folks, some of whom might dress up like a Bat and fight crime.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

      2. You have a point. In an attempt to keep my suburban neighborhood safe, I’ve tried wearing several animal suits to strike fear in the hearts of evildoers. Started out as a velociraptor. Scary critters! But had to give that up once I learned they had feathers and how silly I looked. Then it was a grizzly bear. Great during Des Moines winters, but way too hot the in the summer. End of the day, Bruce Wayne knew what he was talking about when he opted for dressing like a bat. Sleek. Intimidating. And it works for all seasons.

        Liked by 1 person

      7. I like Alan Brennert’s observation that in a superhero universe, avenging your parents by becoming a crime fighter is the equivalent of a woman who lost her daughter to drunk driving founding MADD

        Liked by 1 person

  9. I still wasn’t reading new comics at this time, and looking at the Batman covers on DCUI I started reading the title in 1983. I’ve always been a DC fan first and foremost, but Batman is way down on my list. My favorite team is the Legion and Superman is my favorite hero. After those A lot of lessor heroes and team are above Batman: the Flash, Hawkman, Dr. Fate, Adam Strange, Metal Men, Supergirl, Superboy, and the Atom all immediately come to mind.

    As which version of Batman I like the best, I really don’t have a favorite. I’ve always liked the version of Batman in the comics of the 60’s, as those are the first ones I read. Which is also why I enjoyed the Adam West Batman series. Once I started reading his titles again around 1983 or so I did prefer his titles as they because darker and more serious. However, much as I liked The Dark Knight Returns I think it made Batman too dark. I think The Killing Joke may be almost perfect: while it’s very dark, Batman is clearly still human and even more, is still rational and doesn’t give in to his emotions. Some version would have beaten the Joker to death, but here he refrains from doing so.

    As for this story, despite my liking the sixties stories, I don’t really like this one. I don’t like the Irv Novick artwork, which I don’t think fits the tone of the story. And the villain is pretty bland for a Batman foe. It requires Batman little detective work to figure everything out and then don’t even see how Robin and then Batman get past the traps and thugs. And the confrontation with Crazy Quilt was almost anti-climatic.

    Not Batman’s finest hour.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

      1. I hated that Babs got shot and lost the use of her legs. John Ostrander did a good thing using her as Oracle (did he create the Oracle function and identity?) in his “Suicide Squad”. And she later rejoined the “Bat-family” back in Gotham, and even Morrisson’s JLA.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. I was used to the generally gentle Joker (thanks to the Comic Code) of the sixties, so I wasn’t really prepared for his maniacal violence in the story. When the movie came out the following year, I enjoyed it and the violence didn’t surprise or bother me. However, it wasn’t until DC published the Batman and Dark Knight Archives in the 90’s that I read the original stories. They were certainly eye opening, what with the Joker being the violent sociopath depicted in The Killing Joke and the movie (I am shocked that any of the impressionable children who read those comics grew up without becoming sociopaths themselves).

        Tim, I also hated Barbara being shot and becoming a paraplegic. But that scene absolutely needed to be in the story.

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Completely agree – I also hated what happened to Barbara. But it was an essential part of the story. At the time, I’d hoped it was an imaginary story and that Barbara would be okay.

        Liked by 2 people

      4. Memory is tricky at my age but I seem to recall it was originally going to be. BTW, does anyone else not believe Wein was accurately quoted about ‘killing the bitch’?

        Like

      6. Good. Wein may not have been a favorite but a quote without context makes sense and makes it easier to retain respect.

        Liked by 1 person

      7. As Alan Moore wrote in Superman: Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? ,”This is an imaginary story… aren’t they all?”

        Liked by 2 people

      8. @SEan Pickett, “(I am shocked that any of the impressionable children who read those comics grew up without becoming sociopaths themselves).”

        Sadly, there was the nut who shot up that theater, murdering people, during the showing of “The Dark Knight Rises”.

        But it seems, thankfully, to be the exception. Hopefully millions of kids who’ve read the most violent or twisted Joker stories haven’t hurt anyone else or themselves.

        “Tim, I also hated Barbara being shot and becoming a paraplegic. But that scene absolutely needed to be in the story.”

        Why? If she’d recovered, or hadn’t been as badly hurt, or even shot at all but had just been roughed up or kidnapped, that’d have been enough for me. Besides the gorgeous art, “The Killing Joke” isn’t one of my favorite stories. And I love a lot of Alan Moore’s other work. There’s no better comicbook writer.

        Liked by 1 person

    1. I liked Gene Colan’s Batman a lot. Even more when inked by Klaus Janson. The 2 of them together on “Batman”/”Detective Comics” rank really high for me. Top 10 Bat-art teams, easy; maybe as high as 5th.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  11. Alan Moore wrote another Batman story where Clayface falls in love with a department store mannequin which is remarkable.

    Like

    Reply

    3. I love that story. Much more than “Killing Joke”. Amazing to me how Moore gets us to pity a man who’s committed cruel, awful murder; because he’s afflicted with “crazy stupid love”. I also love George Freeman’s art on it. Fluid, powerful, and maybe a respectful homage to Dick Sprang’s and Jerry Robinson’s takes on Batman.

      Like

      Reply

  12. The story is called ‘Mortal Clay’ by Alan Moore. In Batman annual #11 (1987). Just as good if not better than The Killing Joke.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  13. Well I enjoyed Wein’s run and I like Novick’s Batman a lot too. Crazy Quilt is a D-lister but I prefer those days to “We have an even more homicidal villain for you this month!”

    But Wein’s Untold Legend of the Batman was his standout.

    Favorite Batman? Definitely 1940s through mid-1950s now that I’ve read it all in the omnibuses.

    Like

    Reply

    1. I’d have liked to have read some Slam Bradley drawn by Don Heck. I don’t think it exists. But he’s have done a slam bang up job on it.

      Like

      Reply

    1. Was Bernie the first one that drew the Bat-Ears as about two feet high? I know it wasn’t Kelly Jones, even if he did make them high enough to be goal posts.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  17. Have any of you Bat-fans read Kurt’s ‘Batman : Creature of the Night ‘ Set in the real world your missing out. One of his best books.

    Like

    Reply

  18. Batman was my favorite character when I first got into comics in 1978, but the Batman title itself wasn’t putting out the best stories. But Batman Family and Detective Comics had some decent Batman stories, and Brave and the Bold and World’s Finest helped round out my Batman fix. Plus the excellent Batman Spectacular and the Dynamic Classics reprint comic came out in ’78 as well, so it was a pretty good time to be a Batman fan, Crazy Quilt notwithstanding. Also, didn’t they adapt this story in one of the Batman animated series (maybe The Brave and the Bold)? I remember seeing something with Crazy Quilt somewhere where he’s defeated by the lights being reflected into his eyes.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply