No Man's Land

[thecolorsblend]

Took some time but I finally read No Man's Land a few days ago. I read Cataclysm and Aftershocks probably a year ago but only just now got around to NML.

I was expecting the worst, to be honest... and so was pleasantly surprised! This storyline shows Batman having to evolve, grow and adapt to a VERY different environment. It's still fundamentally Gotham City... but it's a Gotham City stripped of any pretense of civilization or humanity.

Stories this big and epic typically have weak conclusions. This is no different. The point of the story isn't how it ends. In fact, to me few stories are about their endings. What matters is the journey the reader goes on as Gotham City gets closer and closer to going full Walking Dead in terms of depravity.

So don't let what I consider to be a kind of weak sauce ending throw you off. The actual climax of NML is gripping, powerful, tragic and genuinely moving, especially for people like me who loved that, ahem, subplot ever since it was introduced in Batman #458. Or Batman- Year One depending on how you look at it.

Not really a "fun" story but still a very enjoyable one.

Also, I remember people talking about how similar The Dark Knight Rises is in its premise to NML. I don't see it, m'self. To me, the closer similarity is between TDKRises and the Cult. Having actually read NML now, the similarities between it and TDKRises are so circumstantial as to be coincidence.

[The Laughing Fish]

I've read the whole saga, but first I'd like to focus on a particular chapter in Road to No Man's Land.

There was a three issue arc called Waxman and the Clown, where Dr. Jeremiah Arkham - stranded in an isolated Arkham Asylum following the earthquake - faces a growing food shortage and ever decreasing prison staff. As days go by and the dire circumstances get even worse when government aid wasn't forthcoming, Dr. Arkham is forced to deal with a moral dilemma: either he lets all the prisoners starve to death, or he releases them. Eventually, he decides to let them go.

As disastrous as the earthquake was, and how sinister Nicholas Scratch was to persuade politicians and public opinion around the country to leave Gotham City to rot, is it fair to suggest Dr. Arkham was equally culpable for causing further damage by releasing the town's most dangerous criminals? I think so. Jeremiah may have been manipulated by the conniving Joker, but he had been far too idealistic for his own good in wanting to maintain the asylum in the middle of such a catastrophic situation. Joker saw authority rapidly shrinking day by day, and he took the opportunity to make the situation worse as he tampered inmates' medications, and taking advantage of Jeremiah's naivety of staging a fight between Killer Croc and another inmate in a misleading bid to regain control and relieve tension within the asylum. It was enough to persuade the last surviving staff to quit as they realised it's not worth risking their lives trying to salvage a situation out of their control, but Jeremiah felt trapped to stay as he felt it was duty to take care of his namesake facility.

As woefully inept Dr. Arkham was for underestimating Joker as he tries hard to take care of the criminally insane, his decision to let them go stems from his childhood heartbreak of leaving his pet cat behind when he and his family moved homes when he was a child. The trauma of leaving behind those in his care is something he couldn't cope with. The problem is, doing what's best for the criminally insane only results in the putting everybody else who is innocent at risk. Which Jeremiah does acknowledge, but he still feels it's his duty to do what's "right" for the patient. Despite the fact, deep down, he knows none of the prisoners will keep their word in leaving Gotham City alone. And of course as we see in No Man's Land, the decision to release the criminally insane results terrible consequences with Two-Face gaining territory ruthlessly, Joker inflicting more tragedy upon the Gordon family, Scarecrow nearly setting up refugees to get killed and so on. Jeremiah himself is overwhelmed with paranoia to the point he is imprisoned in his own office, gripped with fear that Joker or another prisoner will double-cross him. He might feel the responsibility that lies as the asylum's warden is cursed, but he only has himself to blame for his creating his own situation and endangering Gotham City safety even further.

[The Laughing Fish]

This storyline shows Batman having to evolve, grow and adapt to a VERY different environment. It's still fundamentally Gotham City... but it's a Gotham City stripped of any pretense of civilization or humanity.

I think a good example of how dire the situation is would have to be when Superman visits No Man's Land the first time, and realises his efforts are futile. He thought doing a good deed by helping that engineer to rebuild the power station would've restored a sense of unity and hope within the survivors. Instead, the engineer is forced to ration in order to control a desperate community, and Superman himself doesn't know how to inspire people out of their depression.

Which brings me to my next question and analysis concerning Batman. Is there a consensus, or any sort of fan reaction, towards Batman temporarily giving up when congress voted Gotham City was beyond saving? I may prefer the idea that Batman is always willed to never give up, but I think his initial despair does make sense, and the events leading up to No Man's Land does justify why he had faced an existential crisis.

The despair and helplessness he felt by the earthquake, despite his efforts to rescue survivors and capturing escaped convicts in Cataclysm, made Batman realise he can't be the answer to stop a natural crisis. As Bruce Wayne, he uses his public persona to save the city, and tries very hard to convince multinational corporations to stay and help rebuild it, and attends congressional hearings to plea for government support. But sadly, these attempts go in vain. It's quite telling in that opening scene in the Ground Zero issue as it juxtaposes between present day Bruce bloodily destroying his punching bag while listening to a tabloid TV show making light of his public reaction towards the NML news, to young Bruce looking at a witness from above shutting their window shut and cowardly turning away while Thomas and Martha were getting shot to death. While the rest of the public might not have cared if somebody was getting hurt or killed, Bruce still spent his whole life protecting Gotham City because he cared to save it. But if the rest of the country doesn't care about the city's current suffering, and is more than happy to abandon it and let it rot in ruins, then how could anybody truly blame Bruce for getting discouraged? Thankfully, he was able to overcome this emotional setback and return to No Man's Land. Besides, what the hell else was he going to do, allow himself to continue playing the part as the rich playboy in the company of heartless elitists?

Another moment of juxtaposition that I liked is when Bruce allows himself to get mugged and beaten in Monaco because he didn't care to defend himself, as life seemed to be pretty pointless for him at that moment. While in Gotham City, Helena Bertinelli realised her Huntress persona doesn't command the same level of power and fear among the criminals and adopts the Batgirl persona; immediately making a great impact by stopping a mugging. The public persona billionaire Bruce Wayne might've been useless to stop No Man's Land from happening, but the symbol of the Bat was important more than ever. The recurring washed out image of Martha Wayne screaming seen throughout the issue changes to portrait-like smile in the end signals Batman's new found mission to take control of the situation in NML as much as possible.

[thecolorsblend]

It's been a while since I read the story but I was under the impression that Batman never gave up on Gotham City. He disappeared for a while in order to make plans and get his "house" in order to resume operations in No Man's Land. He needed strategies, plans, war games, etc. He was always planning to stick around. He just needed an actual PLAN for sticking around.

At least, that's my hazy memory of it anyway.

[The Laughing Fish]

It's been a while since I read the story but I was under the impression that Batman never gave up on Gotham City. He disappeared for a while in order to make plans and get his "house" in order to resume operations in No Man's Land. He needed strategies, plans, war games, etc. He was always planning to stick around. He just needed an actual PLAN for sticking around.

At least, that's my hazy memory of it anyway.

I think Bruce explaining to Talia al Ghul that he allowed himself to be beaten up by those muggers in Monaco because he "didn't care" shows how he was was suffering in a period of self-pity and depression. Believing that there was nothing left for him, Bruce was scolded by Talia for letting himself and his parents' memory down, and long story short, it eventually convinced him to "keep his vow" and return to Gotham City. Which I assume it's referring to his mother's memory, judging by the imagery of Martha Kent during the Ground Zero issue. There is a lot of subtlety in this particular chapter. It doesn't make any sense to me that Bruce would allow himself to get attacked if he had planned to get to Gotham City as soon as possible.

I wonder, when Talia told Bruce he was losing everything that's good and noble and implied she could be the one thing that could fill that void in his life, it might've made Bruce remember how forbidden their love is morally. Going to her would go against everything he stood for and lose every sense of his humanity, seeing as she represents the opposite side of the spectrum. Maybe that's why he said to her even if he could go to her, she wouldn't actually have him. Who knows?

[The Laughing Fish]

Does anybody else reckon the scene where the Joker takes advantage of Billy Pettit's paranoid bloodlust where he disguises the cops he captures in Joker regalia to be the most insidious truck he has ever done? Pettit was always a rogue, but the Joker really pushed him over the edge to the point the cop no longer cares if he kills innocent people caught in the crossfire. All that resent he harbored towards Batman and Gordon for not getting rid of the Joker got to his head.

But let's face it, Pettit was always a ticking time bomb waiting to go off. We see the cop in the beginning of NML who not only doesn't quite see eye-to-eye with Commissioner Gordon, but his militant approach makes him consumed with rage to the point he is just as villainous as the Joker. Gordon was interested in trying to keep the peace within the GCPD territory while trying to retain order and operate within his ethical principles as a police officer in a condemned town. Suffice to say, Gordon was trying to keep the peace, and Pettit was ready for war. As soon as he defies Gordon by executing a couple of people after the GCPD defeated a gang and took over their territory, you instantly know this character wasn't going to redeem himself.

Speaking of gangs, it appears the Arkham City video game took some ideas from this storyline, with villains such as the Joker, Two-Face and Penguin marking their territories and raging war with each other. If I remember correctly, one of Hugo Strange's Protocol 10 missile strikes destroy a bridge similar to the one in NML.

[thecolorsblend]

Does anybody else reckon the scene where the Joker takes advantage of Billy Pettit's paranoid bloodlust where he disguises the cops he captures in Joker regalia to be the most insidious truck he has ever done? Pettit was always a rogue, but the Joker really pushed him over the edge to the point the cop no longer cares if he kills innocent people caught in the crossfire. All that resent he harbored towards Batman and Gordon for not getting rid of the Joker got to his head.

But let's face it, Pettit was always a ticking time bomb waiting to go off. We see the cop in the beginning of NML who not only doesn't quite see eye-to-eye with Commissioner Gordon, but his militant approach makes him consumed with rage to the point he is just as villainous as the Joker. Gordon was interested in trying to keep the peace within the GCPD territory while trying to retain order and operate within his ethical principles as a police officer in a condemned town. Suffice to say, Gordon was trying to keep the peace, and Pettit was ready for war. As soon as he defies Gordon by executing a couple of people after the GCPD defeated a gang and took over their territory, you instantly know this character wasn't going to redeem himself.

Speaking of gangs, it appears the Arkham City video game took some ideas from this storyline, with villains such as the Joker, Two-Face and Penguin marking their territories and raging war with each other. If I remember correctly, one of Hugo Strange's Protocol 10 missile strikes destroy a bridge similar to the one in NML.

I regard Pettit as a failure of Gordon's leadership. Gordon was the leader of the Blue Boys. The only way to maintain control over his gang is to strike hard against anybody who defies him. If Gordon had dealt with Pettit earlier on in the process, things would've gone smoother later.

In a survival situation like that NML, even the law doesn't apply anymore. If you're planning to stick around NML and lead a gang, you have to do whatever is necessary.

Gordon wasn't willing to do whatever was necessary. In a lot of ways, Pettit's actions are on Gordon.

[The Laughing Fish]

I regard Pettit as a failure of Gordon's leadership. Gordon was the leader of the Blue Boys. The only way to maintain control over his gang is to strike hard against anybody who defies him. If Gordon had dealt with Pettit earlier on in the process, things would've gone smoother later.

In a survival situation like that NML, even the law doesn't apply anymore. If you're planning to stick around NML and lead a gang, you have to do whatever is necessary.

Gordon wasn't willing to do whatever was necessary. In a lot of ways, Pettit's actions are on Gordon.

Good point. This is syonymous of how hopeless the most idealistic characters working in public institutions are in the entire NML saga. You got Gordon still trying to do everything by the book but it only undermines his authority, Dr. Arkham who is responsible for enacting further chaos on the ruined town by unleashing the asylum inmates in a misguided attempt to save them and Leslie Thompkins still dedicated to fulfilling her duty as a medical practitioner to treat Victor Zsasz even if it nearly got her killed. Although to be fair to Leslie, she is more or less a mother figure who helps Batman not to abandon his sense of morality (as well as her own) in a cesspool environment that's demanding him to stoop to its level. And there were times Batman came close to doing so, such as the moment when he confronts Two-Face at his gang's headquarters, and ponders using Dent's coin to decide his fate as retribution for the cops he had executed. He didn't do it, of course, but the temptation was there. Luckily for him, Gordon and Renee Montoya were able to defeat Two-Face via non-violent means - manipulating him psychologically during that kangaroo court ordeal. Because had Two-Face succeeded in sentencing those two cops to death, Batman definitely would've regretted spurning the chance when he had it.