For a time, I thought Bryan Q. Miller was making a midnight toker reference in Batgirl 22. Then I realized the lyrics are 'a smoker, a joker', not 'a poker, and a joker'. Teach me to pay closer attention to songs played repeatedly on certain radio stations.
I thought it was interesting that Squire attributed The Orphan's crime as a reaction to what happened between Poker and Joker*, because he honestly seemed like just another overly ambitious crook to me. Squire did comment earlier that causing worldwide chronal chaos is a little more crazy than most British costumed crooks, and so maybe it really is a response.
The idea of villains actually taking things that happen to other villains personally always strikes me as odd. Villains are selfish. They use their powers for their gain, generally without regard for others' safety and well-being, and either don't justify it, or do so by claiming they're owed it somehow. I know there are some villains that work together frequently, but even they seem to often be at each others' throats. The Sinister Six have stabbed each other in the back multiple times (Doc Ock turned Sandman to glass at least twice). Cobra ditched longtime partner Mr. Hyde. Even the Flash's Rogues periodically fight and/or kill each other, and they seem like the closest thing to villains that actually like each other.
It's not that I can't buy villains claiming to be angered by something done to them. In the lead up to Infinite Crisis, we had yet another Society of Super-Villains formed out of alleged outrage over mind-wipings perpetrated on some of them by Zatanna. But it was a load of bull, and not just because they were secretly put together by Annoying Twerp Alex Luthor for different reasons. The idea that, for example, Talia cared whether Zatanna mucked with Dr. Light's brain is a joke. Some of the villains might have been concerned it could happen to them, but most of them joined out of fear of reprisals if they refused, or because it provided another excuse for them to commit acts of villainy. The heroes hurt them, so they hurt the heroes back, and this time it'll actually happen, because they have strength in numbers, blah, blah. It's just another convenient excuse the villains give themselves.
It isn't that I don't think super-villains are incorrectly portrayed if they're shown to care about someone besides themselves. I do think the people they care about exist outside that world. Maybe because other villains are competition, or rivals, which makes them obstacles of a sort. You want to rob an armored truck, but they hit it first. So it's hard to care when they're removed. Or the villains know what they're like inside, and figure other villains must be the same. As they're privy to their own dishonorable thoughts and schemes, they can't trust the others. Caring about another villain could get them betrayed, jailed, killed, their powers or weapons stolen. A villain can imagine someone outside the criminal world is different, so it's safer to care about them.
* My guess is that what happened answers my question of whether the Joker will be setting up Joker Incorporated to counteract Batman Inc. I'm pretty sure the answer is "No."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I think some of them can have concern and compassion for another villain, for example a 'work colleague' that they've teamed up with in the past (cf the infamous-for-other-reasons piece of fanfic that placed Shocker and Rhino as good buddies who would help each other out - no, not that way).
I do agree with you that they are not necessarily going to care about the 'supervillain on the Clapham omnibus', to mangle Lord Justice Greer's hypothetical reasonable person, but they can care about specific members of their profession with whom they have interacted in the past.
They may even take pity on another criminal, perhaps? "Look, I know he was a loser, but not even Stilt Man deserved that, dude."
Matthew: You're probably right, it's not as though they're lacking in the emotions most other folks have. I'd just have a hard time taking most of them at face value if they said it. Like non-super crooks, they like to make excuses for their behavior, and that behavior makes me less inclined to buy their excuses.
If Lex Luthor said he was doing something for a particular reason, I'd believe him, because he strikes me as a villain who knows why he's doing things, and doesn't bother to disguise those reasons from himself.
Except Luthor's the least likely to care about what happens to other villains, so that's kind of worthless.
Ironically I'd say that Luthor is the criminal who lies to himself the *most*, at least in some incarnations. He can carp on about wanting to remove alien influence or letting the human race stand on its own feet as much as he likes, the truth is that he got upstaged by Superman and he can't take it.
Post a Comment