Barbara Gordon is Batgirl again.
And apparently, the events of THE KILLING JOKE still appear to have happened.
For many people wary of the new direction of the DC Universe, these mere facts seem to have been at the top of their list of grievances. Both online and in the comic shop I work at, I’ve seen or heard complaints ranging from, “THEY’RE DE-MOOREIFYING THE DCU,” to “BABS SHOULD NEVER STOP BEING ORACLE.” Some of the complaints have been downright entertaining, others mystifying.
Here’s how I see it: The DC Universe, relaunched or not, is a fictional place of infinite possibilities. Here are a few inconsistencies between the DC Universe and our own…
* Interstellar travel is a daily occurrence for some.
* Death is not a thing of permanence.
* You walk down the right street at any given time in Gotham or Metropolis, you might encounter: Ghostly spirits (either of the good or evil variety); Beings that can propel themselves faster than the speed of light (without destroying their joints in the process); Alien life that we are not only fully aware and accepting of, but even some who live among us.; Recruits to a military organization fly into space and take orders from a race of short, blue immortals and a drill sergeant that may or may not call you a “poozer;” and, By that token, in the DCU, a little piece of green jewelry can conjure up anything that its wearer can imagine.
So, why is it so unbelievable to think that in this place, a woman who was once paralyzed from the waist down would regain her ability to use her legs? An argument based on “realism” in a universe that is inherently fantastical has no merit. I understand the argument of (and empathize with) similarly afflicted paralyzed people that saw Oracle as a personal hero that reached beyond the bounds of her chair to make her world a better place. The fact, though, is that the definitive Batgirl is and always will be Barbara Gordon. If death is temporary in comics, then paralysis has to be as well, or else the rules of the universe make less sense than they probably should.
Now, I was born in 1987, and THE KILLING JOKE came out in 1988. In my comics-reading lifetime, I have never known a present-day Babs-as-Batgirl story until now. I’ve always loved the character and hoped I would see her back in her definitive role someday, and that wish has now been granted with a writer that perhaps knows Babs better than anyone: Gail Simone. Simone wrote what is probably considered the most popular run of the BIRDS OF PREY title, and has gone on record about her love for the character of Barbara. From where I sit, I don’t think that this book could be in better hands.
Batgirl #1 is, basically, Barbara’s reintroduction to audiences as Batgirl, and her readjustment to her role with the trauma endured by The Joker still very fresh in her mind. I like that Simone addresses that encounter as one that Babs will always be affected by in some way, as in recent years it never seems that she’s been overly troubled by it. It makes sense to me that in the first stretch of time since regaining the use of her legs (how we don’t know yet), she would be a little more sensitive to her injury when encountering a gunman her first time back out on the streets.
Beyond the initial bit of characterization, though, the book gets a little bit sloppy. In true number one fashion, it tries to set up the new status quo of the character by showing us her living situation and the supporting characters present there, but I felt like those more extraneous details could’ve probably been saved for at least the second issue. Because of pages being spent on these developments, I feel like some time was taken away to flesh out the new villain of the story and the motivations surrounding that new character. I can’t really see the issue’s higher spots suffering with the removal of the status-setup pages, but maybe it’ll be clear by the end of the arc that the structure was well managed. For this first one, though, I feel it could’ve been better.
Ardian Syaf, last seen by Bat-fans in the BLACKEST KNIGHT: BATMAN tie-in series and a few issues of SUPERMAN/BATMAN, delivers strong line and clear proportions in this first issue. He’s pretty good with the conveyance of emotion, and with that he allows a sense of urgency to pop off the pages in both the opening setup and the climax. I’ll be interested to see the way that he conveys the villain’s power when we learn more about it, as it sounds like for each personal case it might require a stroke of imagination on the artist’s part. Pretty solid on his front, overall.
The conclusion that I can’t help but come to is that BATMAN #1 is a book that is merely alright. It’s not a bad read by any means, but it’s not as great as I might’ve hoped considering it’s the reintroduction of a long inactive member of the Bat family (at least as a patrolling hero). Simone is masterful with the moments detailing Barbara Gordon herself, with the nervousness, the feelings surrounding her past, and her overall skill and way of looking at problems all feeling very genuine and real. It’s just the moments where she gets away from Barbara herself that tear this book down from solid to relatively shaky. Given Simone’s past work, it’s easy to have faith in what will come down the pike, but I would’ve preferred more unilateral focus on Barbara and building her back up as Batgirl before you start taking her into more areas of the beast that is Gotham.
In the end, though, I can’t help but feel that it’s damn good having Babs back as Batgirl, because even if I hadn’t seen her jumping the rooftops in the suit firsthand, as a classic Batman
