I Am Going To Rant About Batman Again. You Are Warned.

I've been debating writing this post, because I don't like to bore you with too much griping about Batman, and I did some in that post last week about my approach to continuity. But the St. Louis Cardinals made a trade that pissed me off yesterday, and I need to vent. So blame Tony LaRussa. He doesn't actually have anything to do with the post, but he's the reason behind the trade, so he's why I want to vent. Moving on.

I think Batman is the Peyton Manning of superhero comics. Not in the sense they both prepare obsessively, or they both have frighteningly large foreheads. Manning tends to have his poor performances excused by the announcers, analysts, and sportswriters. He threw 4 interceptions in a game against Dallas a little over a week ago. Two of those interceptions were returned for touchdowns, and Peyton's team lost. Yet, Ron Jaworski was on PTI later that week, and actually said Peyton played great . . . except for the 4 interceptions. Which is a bit like saying I cooked a great dinner, except for the fact my guests contracted food poisoning. When Peyton threw an interception that clinched the Super Bowl for the Saints, Peter King argued the primary blame fell on Peyton's receiver, then credit to defensive back Tracy Porter, then some blame for Peyton. So he was the least responsible for his interception. It's not like this was one of those passes that bounced off the receiver's hands, into the hands of a defensive back*. Peyton threw a pass, Porter jumped in between him and Reggie Wayne, INT.

The litany of excuses goes on and on. Peyton's receiving corps is too injured. he doesn't have a running game. His offensive line isn't holding up. Blah, blah, blah. To be fair to Peyton, he does take at least some of the blame, though he's made critical comments about his offensive line before, and there are times during a game where he yells at his receivers after an incompletion and you can't tell whether he's telling them what route they were supposed to run, or if he's just blaming them in front of a stadium full of fans. Either way, I'm fairly sure he doesn't tell the sportswriters to constantly excuse his poor play.

So what's that got to do with Batman? Well, Batman the character doesn't have anymore control over how he's presented, but that presentation does alter how fans perceive him. Batman's sometimes written as a paranoid, manipulative sort. He devises plans to kill his Justice League teammates. He sets up elaborate tests to either push his proteges' training further (Tim in the past, Steph now), or to try and make them give up (Steph in the past)**. He makes decisions concerning his proteges' lives without consulting them first (revealing Robin's secret identity to Spoiler, trying to get between Cass Cain and Superboy). He holds his approval in front of all of them like a carrot on a stick.

But the writers seem to excuse these choices. They seem to want me to believe Batman did a good thing, doing that. It's like they're afraid Bats will send them to the corn field if they're not careful. Now, I have seen Batman admit he was wrong***, but it's rare, and what's more, the other characters don't seem to mind. Cass didn't seem to get angry he got between her and Conner, rather than perhaps letting the two kids figure out they weren't right for each other****. Tim was initially mad about the fakeout test thing, but ended up coming back, and even said he didn't expect Bruce to apologize. To which Bruce said 'I hope not,' which suggests Batman still thinks he did the right thing, and either Tim agrees, or isn't willing to call him on it.

I still don't understand what Johns was going for in Infinite Crisis, for that matter. Batman tells Nightwing it's up to him to rally the heroes because unlike Bruce, Dick has stayed on good terms with them. This gave me hope. Batman recognizing his antisocial tendencies have hampered his effectiveness in this dire situation? Hooray! Pity it didn't play out that way. Nightwing was only able to round up Superboy with his call to assemble, while Bats roped in Green Arrow, Black Canary, two Green Lanterns, and Mr. Terrific for his assault on Brother I. Plus, Booster and Jaime Reyes showed up of their own accord. Apparently Batman being a jerk to everyone in the world didn't burn those bridges after all, which kind of undercuts anything the story might have been pushing as an impetus for him to behave differently. He's not being penalized for it, so why would he stop acting the way he has?

It makes the other characters come off as apologists, excusing Batman's actions because it was for their own good, or he meant well, or whatever. But really, he's being a jackass and they need to call him on the carpet for it. They do occasionally, such as the OMAC Project, when Booster went off at Batman for letting Ted Kord go to his death when Batman knew, or at least had a better idea than Ted, what he was walking into to. But then, Booster's still the one bringing Jaime to Batman to help. I know, it was a Crisis, heroes put aside their differences in the face of a greater threat, but it still feels like the writers are saying the stuff Batman pulled was OK*****.

Though the treatment of the two is roughly the same, my reaction isn't. Peyton's not one of my favorite players, but I don't tend to fault him for what announcers and writers say. With Batman, I do roll my eyes a bit at the writers, but it helps feed into my distaste for the character. Of course, the writers actively control what Batman says and does, so they're trying to get a response out of me. I doubt they get the response they wanted, but who can say? Both cases are frustrating, though, because I expect the analysts to call out Manning as they would most QBs, and I keep waiting for the other characters to do the same to Batman.

* During the Green Bay-Detroit game yesterday, Aaron Rodgers threw a deep pass to Greg Jennings, who had outrun the defender. He was in perfect position, but the ball hit his hands and bounced back over his shoulder, into the hands of the pursuing DB. That's an INT you could say wasn't the QB's fault, and I'm sure Peyton's had some of those. Just not the one in the Super Bowl, or the ones I saw from the Dallas game.

** With Tim there was a story where Batman made it appear Alfred sent a warning from the future that one of the Bat-group would go too far and establish dictatorial control over Gotham, forcing Tim to try and figure out which of his friends it was. When it was revealed as a ruse, Bats chided Tom for not dismissing it outright for the use of time travel, even though Tim is friends with Impulse, who is from the 30th Century, and Bats was on a team with Booster Gold, who is from the 25th Century. This was an attempt to take Tim to the next level of investigation, to make him question everything.

*** When he revealed Tim's identity to Stephanie, to be exact. Except he admitted it to Stephanie, when it was Tim he wronged. Even when he does the right thing, he does it wrong.

**** They probably weren't, though it would have been nice if they'd the opportunity to try.

***** The Ted Kord thing is especially galling, because I had the impression Batman blew him off because Zatanna's mindwiping had worn off, and he was angry about what she and the Satellite JLA had done to him. Which is fine, be angry, but Ted had nothing to do with that. You know who takes out their frustrations with others on innocent bystanders? Super-villains. Maybe that wasn't it, maybe Bats just hated Ted Kord, but my impression was it was Identity Crisis fallout.