trustyside-kick said:
I found the issue. It is Batman #645 on the cover says A Robin's Tale. On the inside cover says "Show me yesterday, for I can't find today".
If any of you Robin haters like El_Payaso appearently have read that issue then that is basically why Batman needs a Robin. I hope I will not have to go back and try to quote parts of it since it is so long. Lol.
P.S...Sorry for the triple post..I know...just they were at different moments and I did not want to do a lot of editting when the first one had nothing to do with the next ones.
That same notion was explained more than ten years ago, in the "A Lonely Place of Dying" storyline, where Tim Drake sought out Bruce Wayne, having already deduced that Bruce was Batman. He also knew that Dick Grayson had been Robin, and that Jason Todd had also been Robin, and he knew what had happened to them -- see, Tim's a naturally gifted detective. At any rate, Tim had tracked down Nightwing (then leader of the New Teen Titans) and tried to get him to come back to Gotham to help Batman, because he felt that Batman needed a Robin. But Nightwing couldn't be Robin anymore, and he let Tim know that in no uncertain terms.
This of course all led up to Tim taking the old costume out of the case and putting it on himself in order to help Batman. Batman was getting the hell knocked out of him reguarly and Tim felt that he had sort of a death wish, that he was reckless and self-destructive without Robin.
Alfred and Dick agreed, and they ended up convincing Bruce that Tim needed to stick around.
I don't know that I subscribe to that theory; I don't think Batman needs a Robin, but I think Robin can be a good character when he's handled properly and I wouldn't mind seeing him eventually in the movies if, and only if, he's done right.
AnimeJune said:
An understandable quandary - but still. The reasoning that "If I can't stop him, I might as well encourage him to do it" doesn't seem right to me. Of course, to Batman's vengeful mind it would probably make all kinds of sense ("he wants to do what I want to do, why not teach him how to do it right?"), I still believe that what Batman's doing is wrong. Batman's choice for fighting crime emotionally cripples him, and I'm adverse to the idea of him encouraging that kind of self-destruction on a teen. I mean, I'm not a complete expert of the comics - did he start when he was a teen, or when he was an adult?
I'm going to have to take some issue with this paragraph, at least. First of all, what Batman does is not about revenge. It's about serving the common good. He's not out for revenge, he's out to protect the innocent and serve justice. Not the law, but justice. He puts his own life on the line to save other lives. He is a compassionate person.
With that said, THAT's why Batman's guidance is needed. He's not corrupting Dick into seeking vengeance; he's teaching Dick that what he's doing can't be about vengeance; he needs to turn his rage and his pain into a social conscience, and instead of trying to make himself feel better, he needs to protect the innocent and help keep what happened to him from happening to other people.
In the comics, Bruce began his own training as a child. He decided when he was 9 or so that this was his life's work, protecting the innocent. He set out to learn all his skills -- criminology, deductive reasoning, fencing, martial arts, boxing, wrestling, acrobatics, gymnastics, escape artistry, etc -- in order to prepare himself for this role. It took him more than a decade. By the time he was in his 20's he was ready; he returned home to Gotham and set about things much in the manner that they are portrayed in "Begins," that is, he built his hideout in the cave, put together a costume, started up his public persona, sought out Jim Gordon as an ally because of his honesty and bravery, etc.
Batman having begun his own training as a child, would certainly have no qualms about beginning Dick's training as a child, either. And Batman is a one-stop-shopping kind of mentor. Batman can teach Dick all these things that Batman had to learn from a hundred different people all around the globe. Dick only needs one sensei, and his name is Bruce Wayne. Similarly, by the time Dick is 20 or so he realizes that he can't be a "Boy Wonder" anymore. He goes off on his own and becomes Nightwing.
On the other hand, it does remind me of how some parents let their underage kids drink alcohol at home, because at least they're somewhere safe when they're doing it, so I can see your point. It doesn't mean kids underage SHOULD drink alcohol (although I'm sure lots of people on this board would contest that), but if they're going to do it anyways, might as well monitor it and teach them how to be responsible.
So by all means - it Batman didn't do it, it would probably go against his character. Doesn't mean I think it's the right thing to do. In the end, though - it actually makes Batman a more interesting character. I like ambiguous grey-area dudes.
Well, I'm not one to quote from crappy movies, but Alfred did say something worthwhile in "Batman Forever," regarding this very issue: "Young men with a mind for revenge need little encouragement. What they need is guidance." Basically, what you said is right. On a funny side note, my Dad let me taste a sip of his beer a few times when I was a little kid, and I thought it was disgusting. Now I'm 29 and I don't drink. What my Dad did certainly didn't hurt me, did it?
trustyside-kick said:
No......Year 3 is not...just like Year 2 is not. Year Two was basically replaced with The Long Halloween and Year 3 by Dark Victory.
Year 2 is or is not in continuity depending upon whom you ask. Obviously it was INTENDED to be in continuity or it would not have been called "Year 2." Same deal with Year 3. Dark Victory came out after I stopped collecting. When I was collecting, Year 3 was completely within continuity.
Similarly, when I was a kid in the 70's and 80's, it was still in the continuity from when Bob Kane and Bill Finger started it in '39. Essentially, what is "in continuity" is constantly changing. So it doesn't matter if Year 3 isn't in continuity by current reckoning; it WAS ONCE. Just as before "Year One" there was "The Untold Legend of the Batman." Just because something is continuity now, doesn't negate the fact that it once was. In this discussion, every single official telling of the Robin story - whether it's from the 40's, or whether it be Year 3, or Dark Victory, B:TAS, or, hell, even Batman Forever, is relevant to this discussion.
And Jeph Loeb is not overrated. Tim Sale's drawings are awesome; give a different feel to each character than most artists.
Jeph Loeb is a decent author, nothing more. He has a tendency to wedge too many characters into his stories and tie too many things together. I realize it's done partially to create red herrings and throw us off the scent in his mystery stories - and I do like the fact that Loeb writes mysteries - but it annoys me to be reading Hush and find a great character like Ra's al Ghul used as a lamp-post. This only happens because Loeb sticks too many people into his stories.
To make things worse, now all you kids who started collecting Batman in the past ten years think Batman was CREATED by Jeph Loeb, that nobody else but Jeph Loeb matters. Jeph Loeb is, to crib a phrase from Charles Dickens, but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of Batman authors.
Tim Sale is vastly overrated as well. I understand the intention behind his artwork but he's really not that good. He draws Selina Kyle ugly, he makes Batman look like a cave man, and his art often lacks drama. He's trying to have "style" like Frank Miller or Mike Mignola, but he rips them both off wantonly and isn't fit to light either man's farts. And that's the truth.
