One idea I particularly defend is Bruce Wayne in many ways is much more heroic than Superman or almost any other superhero. It´s not so hard to be Mr. Nice Guy when you´re raised by two loving parents - even if adopted ones - in a nice farm in Kansas. But in front of what Bruce went through in his childhood, you can say anything about dressing up like a bat, but the truth is he could easily have become nothing but a depressed guy full of self-pity, a drug addict, a suicidal guy, even a serial killer. Instead, he took his tragedy and decided to use those dark feelings and motivation and make something positive out of it, help make his city a better place and try to prevent others from suffering as he did. Yeah, there is an element of hatred in revenge as well in what he does, but he still to some extent manages to keep that under control. Darwyn Cooke gave an excelent definition: Bruce gives other people a chance for a happiness he knows he´ll never experience himself.
Here´s an article I wrote a while ago on his vigilantism:
BATMAN – FRIEND OR FOE?
Let´s face it, the concept of the superhero is inherently connected to that of the vigilante, that is, someone who exercises any form of law or “justice” enforcement without going through the proper legal channels to do so. Technically, even boy scout Superman is a vigilante. But the vigilantism debate always seems to gravitate more often towards Bats than other superheroes. Perhaps it´s due to the fact the character doesn´t have any superhuman skills, which makes him a bit closer to a “real” vigilante, even though legally it doesn´t really make any difference. One thing often said about the character is “in real life Batman would get arrested in his first night out” However, there are some circumstances about the dark knight´s vigilantism that are pretty unique when compared to real-life vigilantism. When all is said and done, is Bats a criminal?
The short answer is yes, the long answer is… Well, Batman IS a vigilante, and he operates outside official law enforcement. However, not EVERYTHING that the dark knight does is necessarily illegal. Remember, things like citizen arrests and neighborhood patrols – if they don´t have authorization and supervision by official law enforcement - are forms of vigilantism too. When Bats apprehends a criminal, as long as there´s undeniable evidence that a crime has been committed or was in progress, technically that´s not illegal. Beat up said criminal, as long as it´s in self-defense and/or defense of others, is not illegal either. Actually, like anyone, he could even kill, which he doesn´t, as long as he´s doing it in self-defense. To investigate privately, as well, is not necessarily an illegal activity either, even though you should be licensed to do so, and he clearly doesn´t have such license. Some of Bats´ typical activities in comics, which are ironically some of his most effective ones, are indeed illegal, which includes breaking into private properties, his interrogation methods, which often include physically and psychologically abusing criminals, and often destroying public and private properties. In comics and movies, police force, commanded by Comissioner Gordon, mostly just looks the other way, which in real life would get them in A LOT of trouble.
When Batman is called a vigilante, it must be taken into consideration that he´s a VERY unique example of that activity, when compared to real-life vigilantes, and I´m not just talking about the “dressing up like a bat” thing. Vigilantes can be indeed highly dangerous individuals to society, yet Batman is distinguished by a few crucial elements a) he doesn´t kill or apply punishment on his own, b) he´s highly resourceful and trained in criminology and self-defense. Those two elements alone differentiate him from the most dangerous types of vigilantes, the ones who make themselves judge, jury and executioner – The Punisher, anyone? -, and the enthusiastic amateurs who wanna “play cop”. Some of the things that distinguish Batman, however, also play against him. The mask element, even though justified in comics by his desire to protect himself and those close to him against reprisals, implies he doesn´t want to be accountable for his actions, and yes, the “dress up like a bat” thing, in spite of its symbolical and practical value for the character, will, let´s face it, raise a lot of questions about his mental stability…
Even considering his activities as illegal, the “would be arrested in his first night” thing isn´t quite that simple either. There are criminals, and I mean TRULY dangerous criminals, like serial killers and drug dealers, who operate during years without being caught, and some of them aren´t nearly as resourceful as a billionaire who spent several years training and preparing would be. Which is not to say that he would never eventually get caught, but let´s give the dark knight some credit for his escape techniques…
If Batman chose to, could he act legally and still be Batman - or relatively close? If you get past the whole “dress up like a bat” thing, in some ways he could, yes. Private investigators can be hired by the police as investigative consultants – that´s what TV´s famous obsessive-compulsive detective Monk does, for instance - and someone as well-prepared and resourceful as him would be of use in some of the more difficult cases. In fact, that´s kinda sorta what he already does in his assistance to Gordon in classic comics canon. Of course, there come the more vigilante-like elements of his activities, as the aforementioned secret identity, breaking into private properties, etc., which again would have to count on both his skill to be discrete and a VERY lenient police force/legal system, which are known to be VERY unsympathetic to vigilante activities, even some of the technically legal ones.
But even beyond the merely legal problem, there´s the moral/ethical/social element of what Batman does. Traditionally, the myth of the vigilante hero is connected to the individual, a group or even the population as a whole being unsatisfied with the official authorities, due to corruption/inefficiency/authoritarianism. That´s where lies much of the brilliance of Frank Miller´s reinvention of the character´s mythos with The Dark Knight Returns and Year One. Miller created a context of a terribly violent Gotham City with corrupted/inefficient/plutocratic authorities where you can actually believe Bruce Wayne´s actions would feel necessary, building from sources as old as Robin Hood – oddly enough, pretty much all the major “revolutionary” theories and movements in history started within the elite, but that´s a whole new topic... Not unlike has happened with certain real-life vigilantes and watch groups, even chased and denied by the authorities, Batman gets support from a scared and tired population - and also from a brave man inside the force…Also like a lot of them, Bats is often accused of being sort of a “right-wing nut” who feels the solution for the crime and violence in our society is simply to go out and beat the crap out of thugs. Must be noted, though, that Bruce´s also a devoted philanthropist – the thug Batman beats one night may well become the ex-con Bruce hires one day - and also his rule of not killing demonstrates a surprising level of compassion for the ones he chases for someone so deeply scarred by crime, one that real-life vigilantes often lack.
Legal or illegal, left-wing or right-wing, Batman leaves at least one lesson than can be used by all: one person can make a difference. We don´t have to and should not be apathetic and conformist in the face in injustice, violence, poverty, bigotry or whatever are the ills of the world that tick us the most. Of course that doesn´t mean we should dress up like bats to beat thugs or even that we should disrespect the laws – even though laws can and should be questioned and changed when they´re not serving the best interests of the people. But we can do our share. “Vigilante” comes from the Spanish word for “watchman” or “watcher”, that is, someone who watches, who takes care of.
