#dc comics meta

[kqinoras]

checking to see upcoming dc releases but they all look like this:

batman: stuck in gotham 🌪️🌩️🏚️

batman: dark, doomed, and dangerous 🕯️🃏🎩

batman: window washer wayne 🫧🪣🪟

batman: aquaman special 🌊🐡🔱

batman: the darkest of the knights 🗡️🦇🪦

batman: he adopts another kid 🧑🧃🥊

batman: alfred pennyworth, year 2 🤵‍♂️💼🔎

superman family fun bonanza extravaganza 🤾‍♂️🛝🎳

wonder woman: amazons of the artic (written by tom king) ❄️🔭🌌

harley quinn: harleen’s third boob 💄👠❗️

[nightwingsgypsyrep]

Comic fandoms are super weird in the fact that you will often have “fans” who are very vocal and present in the fandom space, who have never touched the source material. This is something which is discussed a lot.

And then, on the other end of the spectrum, you may have people who have read the source material, and express an opinion on a character/team/event, etc, online. This is fine. This is good. This is how you’re meant to engage with the hobby that you do for fun.

However, what I don’t like is the number of people I see in the notes of posts on tumblr, TikTok, etc, which are like ‘☝️ well actually in this obscure issue from 1979 which is only available in Timbuktu and which was subsequently retconned, this character actually did the thing so it’s not out of character.’

And the thing is, sure, I love it when we can come together to bridge the gaps and collaborate together. But, oftentimes, I don’t think that’s what I’m seeing. Often, these comments are patronising, and weirdly gate-keeping, in suggesting that people can’t have an opinion on the source material unless they’ve read everything ever published, which is just ridiculous.

If you’re a new fan, who is trying to be a “good fan” and engage with the source material, this is going to be incredibly off putting because it suggests that you’re not enough of a fan, so what’s the point? May as well go back to AO3 where you can have fun without being ridiculed in the notes. If you’re an older fan, you can have read THOUSANDS of comics, and still hardly have scratched the surface, and so expressing any thoughts online and engaging with those spaces can still feel dangerous and unwelcoming.

When it stops being a fun addition to a conversation, and starts being a bitchy critique, we’ve all lost the plot a bit.

There seems to be a bit of a disconnect somewhere in the spectrum of ‘has read none of the source material’ -> ‘acts like they’re read everything ever published’, wherein whilst we acknowledge that it’s ok to give more info and collaborate on posts, we never really acknowledge that - for the vast majority of people - having this encyclopaedic knowledge is going to be impossible. I’m an adult with bills and a full time job - I haven’t got time to be reading absolutely everything ever published before I engage with my hobby - the thing I do for fun - online, and I’m sure many others are the same. But that doesn’t mean that I - and others - don’t deserve to engage in these fandom spaces, express opinions, write the fic, draw the art, just as much as if we had read everything ever published since the dawn of time.

Comics are an entirely different medium to books, tv shows, films, etc, in that there is no beginning, middle, and end. There is no singular author who tells the story and then it ends. Comics are inherently collaborative, they are perpetually in medias res, and they are so plentiful that nobody can read absolutely everything, and it’s time we stop gatekeeping, with some of us acting like they are the supreme authority, when the medium of comics means that such a thing can never exist.

Sure, provide that extra info, but I really do think there needs to be a change in how we - comic book fans - conceptualise fandom and our place in it. None of this is serious. We’re all just geeks with a hobby trying to have fun. None of us are ever going to read everything. So let’s just have fun and try not to take it so seriously.

[soleminisanction]

Another interesting evolution of the whole discussion between Dick and Tim at the start of Red Robin is that, by this point in canon (2025 going into 2026) their respective interpretations of Robin-as-partner/equal and Robin-as-sidekick/mentee/lesser have been transferred to Tim and Damian.

In the "two Robins" era, that's grown to be the distinction between stories about Tim as Robin and stories about Damian as Robin, most clearly displayed by their respective roles in Zdarsky and Faction's Batman runs, but also things like, the Urban Legends #10 Christmas story vs. everything in the current Batman & Robin book (post-Joshua Williamson, who doesn't write Robin stories, he writes Damian, Son of Batman stories). Damian gets stories about Robin as a mentorship, as training, as parental bonding, as a time to learn and grow, but also as something he might feel trapped in and no matter what future you see for him (Batman, doctor, whatever) as something he doesn't want to do forever.

Tim, meanwhile, gets the stories about Robin as Bruce's partner and equal, the one watching Batman's back as much as his back is being watched in turn, who gets to lecture him about taking care of himself but also get big damn hero moments pulling him out of crazy superhero shenanigans. He's an independent young adult with his own life, but he's also Bruce's loyal partner, and he'll be there when Batman calls.

This is also probably the reason why Tim keeps getting hurt/shot: rescuing each other is a vital part of the Batman & Robin as partners dynamic. If Bruce lets Damian get hurt, that's him failing as a caretaker, so the worst he probably gets is kidnapped. But Tim is on a more equal footing, so they can raise the narrative stakes by injuring him, and then he and Bruce take care of each, because that's what partners do.

This is also why it feels increasingly obvious to anyone actually reading the comics that Damian is more likely to leave Robin before Tim does: not because he is lesser or less deserving, but because his perspective on being Robin is not one that persists into adulthood and Tim's is. It's just a different point of view.

And from a storytelling perspective, it works out pretty well, because it means that people in the real world with different opinions on What It Means to Be Robin get to have their pick. TBH only way it could be better is if Tim and Bruce had a space for more consistent interactions ala the current Batman & Robin title, or if that title traded off storylines or something.

[3ch0locator]

look i cant stop anyone from making "haha look how similar the old-man dick and jason are to bruce! they must be his biological children" jokes. however, i can say i find them extremely uncomfortable and tiring. they are signaling the idea that "biological" family is better or more family than adoptive family relationships and re-enforcing the idea. "if the children act or look like bruce they must be biologically his !" is quietly implying that if they are not biologically his, they are not really his.

this is a way of thinking that damian, the someone who called himself "the blood son" had to actively unlearn. it is something the comics have explicitly stated is untrue and the repeated jokes de-valuing the adoptive/foster parent and child relationship are tiring in a fandom build on found family dynamics.

[charmnecklacecreatures]

i genuinely think one of the most fascinating mischaracterizations i've seen in this fandom is of oliver. i genuinely think some particular aspects of GA 1988 impacted his character in a way that they haven't been able to shake since.

to be clear, the first time ollie "cheats", he's assaulted. he's shot and nearly dying, and has someone take advantage of him in a vulnerable state. this gets played off as twofold: one, the "men can't get assaulted" (dinah is written as not believing shadō's story, claims ollie probably just wanted to fuck her anyway) and two: the "he probably wanted to fuck her anyway" of it all. categorizing this as "cheating" when it's assault just because "he would've done it anyway" is actually a truly unhinged take and if you hold it i think you should maybe reflect on why you think that invalidates assault. mike grell made it very clear; his intention was to stress and break the relationship between dinah and ollie with shadō so he could "explore other parts of himself" before ultimately returning to dinah. he said as much. but having him be sexually assaulted and then having that played off as infidelity is actually genuinely alarming. i've said it for a long time; this run feels like it was written by a man going through a midlife crisis and he took that out on ollie.

additionally, the subsequent cheating involved two other people both before and after ollie's death. before was marianne, who, from the moment she's introduced, is infatuated with oliver. she's basically a****w k*******g's cupid but instead of turning into a villain, she works at sherwood florist and kisses ollie. then is joanna, whom ollie cheats with before she ultimately gets killed off. (while i have my qualms with a lot of this, at the very least him cheating with joanna incites their breakup and a lot of his journey to growth throughout a generally okay run)

i think the thing people are failing to recognize is that the people who carry over ollie being a fuckboy into his relationship with dinah are often not portraying women in a positive light. grell had dinah kidnapped, brutalized, had her powers stripped, and then decided it was okay for ollie to be assaulted by someone because dinah couldn't have kids with him and shadō could. when she was included in the plot, she wasn't black canary and was mostly either fighting with ollie or having sex with him. winick insisted on having ollie cheat in the first arc of his ga 2001 run. not only that, he cheated with joanna whom he then killed. judd winick wrote a black woman getting hanged as part of this plot point. i don't think i need to elaborate further on the misogynoir here.

ultimately, ollie's reputation for not being a flirt but a cheater is rooted in runs that are pretty expressly misogynistic, or at the very least actively punish the women in the plot. i really resent the depiction of ollie as a cheater, when the reason those plots exist is because of sexism and the romanticization of ollie being a "womanizer". he was a fuckboy before the island. he was a shameless flirt before he met dinah. but he was a "cheater" when being written by someone who thinks sexual assault is no big deal if the person doing it is hot and then again (only once) by someone who thinks fridging women (especially a black woman - by hanging.) is okay.

maybe, just maybe the "ollie is a playboy who will always cheat on dinah" thing is an incorrect extrapolation from a very specific period of time in his writing. the frustrating thing is that the times when his relationship with dinah is good (like rebirth! or when he first comes back in quiver and doesn't REMEMBER cheating on dinah! or bronze age! or green arrow 2023!) it seemingly gets forgotten about in favor of the more salacious version.

anyway all of that to say i'll still defend dinahollie and unfortunately oliver queen.

[avayarising]

The Batfam Death Project Masterpost

This post will contain links to all major posts relating to this project. Subscribe for updates, which will be announced in the replies to this post.

General information

Introduction

Timeline of all deaths and major world events

Charts and figures

Lists of death experiences and related events

(actual depicted deaths + ambiguous/implied/inferrable/arguable deaths + non-death trips to the afterlife)

List of all Bruce’s deaths (dozens (around 20 separate incidents) + 2 + 0)

List of all Dick’s deaths (5 + 0 + 2)

List of all Jason’s deaths (5 + 3 + 0)

List of all Tim’s deaths (3 + 3 + 2)

List of all Damian’s deaths (6 + 2 + 1)

List of all Cass’s deaths (2 + 2 + 1)

List of all Steph’s deaths (2 + 1 + 0)

List of all Barbara’s deaths (1 + 0 + 0)

List of all Alfred’s deaths (2 + 0 + 0 + 3 undead appearances)

List of all Kate’s deaths (1 + 1 + 0)

List of all Duke’s deaths (0 + 1 + 0)

(These numbers may be subject to change if I uncover further death experiences.)

More details on selected individual events

Dick in the Murder Machine: Forever Evil 6–7, 2014.

Bruce’s first death – the Death Cheaters: Batman 1:72, 1952.

Bruce’s longest death – The Obsidian Age: JLA 1:68–75, 2002–2003.

[phantomchick]

it doesn’t help that a lot of time in fandom spaces when you attempt to talk about you know who committing abusive actions regularly against all his adopted children at this point you usually get shouted down or accused of being a jason stan lmao. sorry that it’s been continuously in the text for a while now guys. ppl are starting to notice.

Oh for sure, been there.

People love to act like being a Jason fan invalidates your opinions about Batman which is ridiculous obviously but bullshit fandom hierarchies are going to bullshit. But now it's reaching the point where fans of other characters are also getting rubbed the wrong way by the manner in which Bruce is being handled too so the discourse is gradually getting spicier.

And genuinely, I don't begrudge people who love batman or who want him to be a good person/hero/father. Like, some of my favourite comics are where he is all that and I definitely got into comics based off my love of batman and b:tas, so I get it y'know?

But it's reaching a point where too many incidents of Bruce being an absolute shithead (violent or otherwise) to his kids are cropping up to be waved off as 'oh he was traumatised by x/possessed by y/trying to protect them from ect.' and dc fans have unfortunately been placed in a position where we've gotta reckon with what it means for the characters, our perceptions of batman and his themes regarding family vs heroism. It's difficult to reconcile loving batman with hating how he's written when it comes to his children, especially when he's been written this way for so long at this point with each false fresh start reconciliation making us less likely to trust and less interested in the next attempt. And shutting down conversations about it in fanspaces isn't helpful.

I also think a part of it has to do with peoples' perceptions of what an abuser is, an abuser can't be someone they like, admire and they definitely can't be redeemable or excusable. And Batman acting like one even if he isn't 'defined' as one is getting a lot of peoples' backs up/making them reluctant to allow for any discussion of his actions let alone what they mean for the character as they understandably don't want to be the fan of an abuser and it's exposing a lot of black and white worldviews which is interesting bc dc comics is ALL about redemption in terms of its heroism so y'know there's that.

How far is too far to forgive? Is Batman tainted forever if we start to seriously acknowledge the shit he's done? Is it hypocritical to hold only him to account for bad writing when Jason fans ourselves for example often ignore modern reinterpretations of his origin story, death and robin era personality and morals as red hood? Lots of interesting yet explosive stuff for fandom to dig into here.

To wrap it up I'm quoting myself here but:

Mileage on tolerance of fluffy batdad/good bruce fic is going to increasingly vary the longer dc keeps writing him so poorly and that's just a fact. Vice versa fics that recognise shitty things he's done to his kids or write him as a bad or mediocre parent are going to keep cropping up so it feels like now's the time for people on both sides of the line to remember the basics of fandom etiquette, aka: don't like don't read.

[face-without-a-heart]

I wonder how conversation about what is/is not canon will change once characters like Batman and Superman are public domain. It’s not like Sherlock Holmes, where there were a million spin-offs and adaptations before the character went into public domain, but they’re all still based off of the ACD short stories, which people think of as like the “truest” version of the character. People don’t think that way for Siegel and Shuster’s Superman comics. Their ideas of what Superman is come from the hundreds of different creators who have written him over the years, a lot of whom have completely contradictory ideas for what the character should be and don’t have any connecting thread between them other than that they’ve worked for the same company. What happens when that one company isn’t the only one legally allowed to publish stories with that character?