Batman/Superman

For my final essay, I would love to explore the famous dichotomy of Batman and Superman. In the class, we are presented to the pair in the form of former allies, now starkly divided by their respective upholding and distain of an unjust law, in Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns.

            In the Dark Knight Returns, Batman and Superman are represented as polar opposite in terms of where they stand in the modern day. Bruce Wayne is an old man now, not quite what he used to be, on the outside. He has given up his acts of vigilantism, because of a truce the superhumans of yesteryear came to with the United States government. Meanwhile, Clark Kent is still as young and vibrant as he had ever been. Inside, however, Clark has become pacifistic towards the ways of man; instead of being a hero to the people, he is a puppet of the government. Clark’s values as an individual sway him to avoid conflict and take orders from whoever is wearing the badge. Even as civilians, Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent stand as opposites.

            The difference between the two is exacerbated, if not defined by, when they are in costume. Clark Kent’s Superman, stands tall, colorful, all-powerful, and is unafraid of opposition. He doesn’t even wear a mask! Superman is a stark contrast to Bruce Wayns’s Batman: clad in black, residing in the shadows, essentially powerless is you look past his fighting skills and awesome gadgets.

            On a baser level, Batman stands for vengeance, whilst Superman stands for authority. Interestingly both vengeance and authority can be interpreted as a symbol for justice. Batman’s is a more personal struggle against crime as his very origins are steeped in it. Superman, however, is the child of fortune. Raised by country folk, Superman was taught a healthy respect for law and order above all things.

            One can begin to see oppositions in Batman and Superman that parallel political ideologies. Superman, the Man of Tomorrow, is an immigrant from the planet Krypton, raised in the heartland of America. He learns to use his seemingly infinite powers for the good of the people who brought him in. Superman is in a way the embodiment of the American Dream; he is an immigrant, who came to America and made a place for himself in the world. One could go on to note, that he, as with the American dream, is twisted in Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns. Whenever the government has become biased, authoritarian and overpowered, so too has Superman.

            For Batman, after his parent’s tragic demise, he lived a life of financial comfort with the billions he inherited. But Bruce Wayne was so distraught by his parents’ death that he vowed to solemnly avenge them by pouring every ounce of his being into his crusade against crime. Where Superman is the embodiment of the American dream, Batman is the embodiment of the human condition; he is stubborn, resourceful, seemingly powerless, but in possession of a willpower that is second to none. He is an embodiment of what every person can be whenever they give themselves over to a cause bigger than themselves. For Batman, in The Dark Knight Returns, he has become old and frail and in need of a legacy; just as the human spirit is impermanent, and in need of remembrance. 

The Dark Knight Returns: Academic Response

The following is in response to the prompt for the discussion for or against the artistic differences between the film and literary versions of The Dark Knight Returns:

While you make a strong case for the use of The Dark Knight Returns’ art and its’ insight into the world of Miller’s story, I generally disagree that the film version is hindered on an emotional level by the streamlining of its visuals. At the heart of my argument, I generally believe that the art and visuals of graphic novels are second to the nature of story, in terms of emotional determination. Although, I will however compromise and say that art definitely reinforces the tone of a graphic novel.

            One such other graphic novel, conveniently enough another Batman tale, Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth serves the function of detailing character’s appearances based solely on other character’s perspectives. In the graphic novel, written by Grant Morrison and illustrated by Dave McKean, characters outward appearances and even their speech bubbles are based on other character’s thoughts on the character. Maxie Zeus is extremely elongated, sporting a blue text bubble, representing his lightning based abilities. The Joker is almost devilish in appearance, and his text is large and messy, written in scribbled red, bursting through the bubble itself; this all represents the Joker’s antagonistic nature to the Batman as well as his inherent chaotic nature. Batman himself is painted from the view of the criminals, appearing more as a frightening specter than a costumed hero; even his text is white lettering against a black bubble, symbolic of his dark nature. All this is to say that while the art in The Dark Knight Returns is a reinforcement to the tone of the novel, its absence in film form does not hinder the film in any way, unlike it would for the Arkham book.

            While I do like the idea that Gotham may not or may not be as grim and foreboding as it is presented to us, I don’t agree that the Dark Knight Returns is told (shown) threw the vernacular of Bruce Wayne. The points in the story in which we are actually made to observe things perspective are framed for us by Frank Miller. Take for example the final page of Book 1: Batman has just foiled Two-Face’s plan and is now face to face with Harvey Dent. First we see him as he actually appears, then, as Bruce narrates about closing his eyes and being able to actually see him, we get a glimpse at how Batman sees him. The fact that Miller went out of his way to show us Batman’s perspective implies that the book is naturally not seen through his eyes.

            On a personal level, the artwork of The Dark Knight Returns is actually what kept me from reading it for a long time. The dull coloring and disjointed visuals, while symbolically relevant, hinders my enjoyment of the story on a certain level. It’s like these action movies nowadays with their shaky hand-held camera scenes during the action sequences. While it’s all well and good that we feel like “we’re actually there” by having our view be shaky, uneven and unfocused, I’d much rather just  be able to actually see the fellows actually duking it out.

The Dark Knight Returns: Books 3 and 4

In chapters 3 and 4 we follow the Caped Crusader through his final confrontations with both his greatest enemy, the Joker and his (once) greatest ally, the Man of Steel, Superman. Whilst Batman, faces these rather extreme threats, we as an audience take in many more events than our actual protagonist is involved in. A Russian Cold War, a mounting gang problem, looting and rioting are some of the few subplots that we are presented with. Though, each of these subplots are eventually resolved by the Dark Knight himself, they essentially built entirely on their own. 

What Frank Miller does to facilitate the growth of these subplots is rather ingenious, if not a little disjointed, so far as pacing and the flow of the story goes. For example, throughout chapters 3 and 4  we are given newscasts about the increasingly violent acts of the newly formed gang, the sons of Batman. Instead, of a traditional transition into and out of these scenes, Frank Miller takes up only 2 or 3 panels from a page to tell the story. Another quick cutaway that struck me as particularly interesting was the one in book 3, where Batman and Robin are riding to their next destination in search of clues to the Joker's plan, but just prior, we encounter three panels of a flashback or possible daydream of Bruce's father getting shot. Again, this is resolved by Batman later as he justifies to himself the possible killing of the Joker, but the cutaway is more drastic and almost random. Overall, this technique works both for and against this book. On the one hand, it does accomplish the act of advancing the plot faster, by not lingering on the small, growing plot threads, but it also tends to give the book the infamous disjointed feel that it is known for.

Another subject I'd like to discuss, is the relevance of the Batman vs Superman conflict. Here we have a symbolic representation of righteous civilians rebelling against the all-powerful authoritarians. Batman has started to change things, stirring hope and trouble in equal measures. Superman, with his extraordinary gifts is morally obligated, or so he thinks, to help out or aid anyone who is in charge. Batman with HIS history and upbringing is obligated to provide truth and justice no matter what the cost. This is a rather ironic turn of events in that Superman himself is often thought to embody "Truth, Justice and the American Way." Superman has chosen to submit to the tyranny of other men so long as it brings peace. Batman has chosen to defy any and all in positions of power to truly serve justice. A friend of mine once told me a very interesting analogy: Superman is the embodiment of how we, Americans, see ourselves; Batman is the embodiment of how other nations see us. 

In short, the dichotomy of the Batman/Superman relationship was a very interesting one to explore, because of the very political and psychological  implications it has.