The Golden Age Batman

[The Laughing Fish]

I decided to read some comics from the Golden Age era in no particular order.

I got to say I enjoy how much I can imagine the quick-talking-snappy dialogue this would've been these stories were adapted for live-action.  Batman did have a habit of making a lot of lame one-liners that is reminiscent of Spider-Man e.g. knocking over a crook against the table and saying "Tch, tch! A gentleman would never rest their hands on the table!"

The stories had a lot of focus on crime, some ordinary that don't involve too many well-known villains from the rogues gallery since most of them haven't been invented yet (Catwoman was only an ordinary thief who didn't even wore a costume, Joker was a serial killing jewel thief). But contrary to what people have said, the comics did contain some pirates, such Batman and Robin fighting pirates or Batman fighting Hugo Strange and his monster-transformed henchmen. I think my favourites would have to be The Joker's first appearances, the Hugo Strange one and the short story of Jimmy McCoy - a rise and fall story of a mobster who meets his end; presumably Bob Kane and Bill Finger's point about how unglamorous life in organized crime is.

[Silver Nemesis]

I'm glad to hear you're getting into the Golden Age comics. There are some real gems from that era.

Have you noticed certain inconsistencies with the classic mythology in the early stories? An obvious example would be Batman carrying a gun and killing people. But there are other more subtle discrepancies, such as Bruce Wayne living in a penthouse instead of Wayne Manor, or the fact the stories are identified as taking place in New York instead of Gotham City. Did you pick up on those?

[The Laughing Fish]

I'm glad to hear you're getting into the Golden Age comics. There are some real gems from that era.

Have you noticed certain inconsistencies with the classic mythology in the early stories? An obvious example would be Batman carrying a gun and killing people. But there are other more subtle discrepancies, such as Bruce Wayne living in a penthouse instead of Wayne Manor, or the fact the stories are identified as taking place in New York instead of Gotham City. Did you pick up on those?

Admittedly, I've only read two reprints so I've yet to read them all in order. But I did notice that Gotham didn't even get named until a little later. I was intrigued, though, by all the crime stories had an anti-mob agenda trying to discourage readers from admiring organized crime. In Catwoman's debut for example, when Robin defeated all these crooks easily, Batman breaks the fourth wall and tells the readers "Well kids, here is your proof. Crooks are yellow without their guns!" Even for all the criticism for supposedly corrupting the youth at the time, there were moments in comics that tried to dissuade young kids from getting involved in petty crime, which I thought in that particular example was admirable.

It's interesting how Batman's violent course of action comes across believable; preparing to kill in self-defence or to save others if need be. If you ask me, this is a much more believable than the 'I won't kill' policy that is forced in contemporary Batman comics.  He wasn't always bloodthirsty either - he found it regrettable that he had to kill one of Hugo Strange's giants while riding the Batplane.  One thing I do credit writers nowadays is having Batman refusing to use guns - a believable psychological reasoning since his parents were gunned down.

[The Dark Knight]

One thing I do credit writers nowadays is having Batman refusing to use guns - a believable psychological reasoning since his parents were gunned down.

The concept does make sense.

In terms of B89 and the Batwing machine gunning of the Joker goons, I quite like the concept of Batman being like a Jedi Knight. Preferring to engage the enemy one-on-one, with the skill of a batarang or fisticuffs. Viewing a firearm like a Jedi views a blaster. He would prefer not to pick one up, but if he really has to - he will use it.

[The Laughing Fish]

One thing I do credit writers nowadays is having Batman refusing to use guns - a believable psychological reasoning since his parents were gunned down.

The concept does make sense.

In terms of B89 and the Batwing machine gunning of the Joker goons, I quite like the concept of Batman being like a Jedi Knight. Preferring to engage the enemy one-on-one, with the skill of a batarang or fisticuffs. Viewing a firearm like a Jedi views a blaster. He would prefer not to pick one up, but if he really has to - he will use it.

Fair enough - just as long as he doesn't hypocritically tells Catwoman not use firearms, and then continues to chase after a truck by firing machine guns later on. 

[The Dark Knight]

One thing I do credit writers nowadays is having Batman refusing to use guns - a believable psychological reasoning since his parents were gunned down.

The concept does make sense.

In terms of B89 and the Batwing machine gunning of the Joker goons, I quite like the concept of Batman being like a Jedi Knight. Preferring to engage the enemy one-on-one, with the skill of a batarang or fisticuffs. Viewing a firearm like a Jedi views a blaster. He would prefer not to pick one up, but if he really has to - he will use it.

Fair enough - just as long as he doesn't hypocritically tells Catwoman not use firearms, and then continues to chase after a truck firing machine guns later on. 

Indeed!

There is something about the image of a man holding a firearm, shooting point blank at someone/something, just like The Punisher. It's the same result, and he gets a body count, but it comes off detached given he's shooting from his cockpit of the Batwing. The Burton Bat put the threat down and moved on, ala the fire-breathing clown in BR.

[Silver Nemesis]

Fair enough - just as long as he doesn't hypocritically tells Catwoman not use firearms, and then continues to chase after a truck by firing machine guns later on. 

In all fairness, is that really any more hypocritical than the things Bruce says to Selina in Batman Returns about how she shouldn't kill Shreck because neither of them is above the law?

I quite like the concept of Batman being like a Jedi Knight. Preferring to engage the enemy one-on-one, with the skill of a batarang or fisticuffs. Viewing a firearm like a Jedi views a blaster. He would prefer not to pick one up, but if he really has to - he will use it.

Your description here of his attitude towards guns is particularly accurate to the late eighties/early nineties comics. Check out this scene from Cosmic Odyssey (1988).

[The Laughing Fish]

Fair enough - just as long as he doesn't hypocritically tells Catwoman not use firearms, and then continues to chase after a truck by firing machine guns later on. 

In all fairness, is that really any more hypocritical than the things Bruce says to Selina in Batman Returns about how she shouldn't kill Shreck because neither of them is above the law?

I agree with you actually, I've been thinking about that scene ever since the I saw the film in a long time a couple of years ago. If I have one genuine criticism for Burton's Batman as a character, it would be how I found it distracting how the same Batman who ruthlessly killed criminals (and justifiably so, I reckon!) is now suddenly trying to dissuade Catwoman from killing Schreck by claiming neither of them are untouchable by the law. I suppose one could argue that Batman was desperately trying to stop Catwoman killing in the hopes of saving their potential relationship, or Batman himself saw his reflection in Catwoman, but it still doesn't convincingly justify that the moment was out-of-character. Besides, unless the "We are the same, split right in the center" quote is supposed to confirm how Batman saw himself to be no better than Catwoman, I don't remember him having too many doubts about his actions during the film. Which is why I was disappointed that the Nolan movies continued to contradict Batman's stance towards murder and guns even further and make the same mistakes again and again.

[Silver Nemesis]

You make a valid point about consistency. It's one thing for Batman to kill people in the absence of an established moral code. But it's another thing altogether if he specifically says he won't kill people but then does so anyway, which is more or less what happens in Batman Returns.

This same hypocrisy is present in the Golden Age comics. Once the no kill rule was introduced Batman started acting as though he'd never used a gun or killed anyone before. One of the things I like about the Bronze Age Earth-Two comics is that they acknowledged Batman's use of lethal force and attempted to address the inconsistency in his ethics.

In America vs. the Justice Society (1985) Batman admits to using illegal methods early in his career and credits Gordon for making him change his ways.



'The Autobiography of Bruce Wayne' (Brave and the Bold #197, April 1983), one of my all-time favourite Batman comics, shows Batman still using guns after he's taken on Robin as his sidekick. That technically didn't happen back in the Golden Age, but it's cool to see a later comic so unapologetically acknowledging Batman's early use of firearms.



Another of my favourite Bronze Age Earth-Two comics is 'The Secret Origin of Batman' (Secret Origins #6, September 1986) by Roy Thomas and Marshall Rogers. This tells a revised version of the Golden Age Batman's origin, essentially remaking 'The Case of the Chemical Syndicate' (Detective Comics #27, May 1939) and 'The Legend of the Batman - Who He is, and How he Came to Be' (Batman #1, March 1940). It also expands on these origins, explaining how he trained himself to fight crime and showing where he got his costume and equipment from. In addition to this, it attempts to reconcile some of the inconsistencies in the early Golden Age stories; explaining what Batman was doing in New York and why he was living in an apartment instead of Wayne Manor.

All in all, it's up there with The Untold Legend of the Batman (1980) and Mask of the Phantasm (1993) as one of my favourite versions of Batman's origins. I do have one criticism though, and that's that they rewrote the ending of 'The Case of the Chemical Syndicate' so that Batman doesn't kill Stryker. Instead he falls into the vat of acid by accident. Here's the original scene as depicted in Detective Comics #27.



And here's the revised version from Secret Origins #6.



Batman's "A fitting end for his kind" line is preserved, though it loses much of its sting in this revised context.

I really don't like it when writers try to impose the Modern Age Batman's values onto his Golden Age counterpart. Doing so is tantamount to rewriting history and ignoring the character's evolution. There's a lot of fun to be had in going back to the original comics and seeing just how coldblooded the character was in the beginning. No amount of whitwashing will ever erase the violent purity of those stories.

[The Dark Knight]

I don't really see Batman's line at the end of BR as hypocrisy. Hypocrisy = saying one thing and doing another. If what he said to Catwoman was uttered at the commencement of the movie, or sometime in the middle - ala TDK Rises, then we're talking real hypocrisy.

People can change viewpoints throughout the journey of life, and at the end of the movie, it seems Bruce is on track to do so. In BF, Schumacher followed through with it, where he warns Dick against revenge.