2. Most Of The Batman Cast Makes Batman Weak As A Story
When you create the scenario that Bruce Wayne is eternally linked to Batman, he isnt the only character to be effected by that unnatural longevity. The entire story weakens over time in terms of common sense and the effort to tell effective stories using the same stable of characters. The Joker is a massive fan favorite, so the conventional wisdom is that he remains in the books. However, in order to keep the Joker relevant within the story, the bar gets raised with every appearance. In the end you have this character that whose continued existence is supremely impossible. Ask yourself, how many mass murderers are alive after committing the act that defined them as mass murderers. How many mass murderers are even apprehended and not killed in a hail of gunfire? If you painted yourself white, put on a green suit and started poisoning, torturing, kidnapping and murdering people an insanity plea is not going to keep you off of the electric chair because the fact that youre mentally unstable is never in question. Is Charles Manson is an insane asylum? The Joker has literally murdered dozens of people and maimed even more, including the police commissioners wife and daughter, there is no trip to the insane asylum for that, the response to the Joker is shoot on sight, he wouldnt get the chance to walk away in handcuffs. The fact that Batman doesnt kill the Joker isnt the issue, its the fact that the police dont that weakens the story. The same can be said for most of Batmans rogues gallery. The continued existence of most of Batmans enemies has paved the way for comics to follow suit in general, making it acceptable that superheroes are in most instances a reactionary force that can never garner solvency because no matter how heinous the crimes of their enemies are, the heroes or society never put a permanent end to the threat they pose. What does this do? It makes sure that the story never evolves because the same villains are always there, no closure, no justice, no finality. How awesome is Batman if the story makes it clear that he has no permanent impact on the criminal element? Who would want to live in Gotham if The Joker (who is fixated on Batman) can murder at will and then receive a slap on the wrist? Repeatedly. The higher ups at DC comics decided to add Robin to the mix with an effort to lighten the book up, a marketing ploy given life. How come no one pointed out that you were literally teaming a child with a grown man with no powers who did the most dangerous thing imaginable? This forced DC to spend the rest of Robins existence explaining how Batman wasnt guilty of child endangerment, thats why most cops dont have a bring your kid to work day. There was a public reaction that gave DC an out, for a time there were parent groups and others that complained that Robin made the book homoerotic (because of course the obvious issue of child endangerment wasnt a big deal, but the possibility of a connection to homosexual behavior, that HAD to be stopped) in nature. DCs response? Kill Alfred! In Detective Comics #328 Alfred is killed off and replaced by Dick Graysons Aunt to appease those that complained that three dudes living alone in a big house equaled gay. I dont know whats more distressing, the fact that it was even an issue or that DCs response worked. The naysayers died down and about a year later Alfred was suddenly resurrected after receiving a positive response on the Adam West TV series. Yeah, if you thought that death was only a minor issue for superheroes, tell that to Alfred, Aunt May and Mary Jane Watson-Parker for starters. Death is a minor detail in comics because the overall approach is to never really change, which means heroes and villains cant stay dead because that would, you know, change things.