A question that's bugged me about The Dark Knight Returns

[anarky]

Actually two, but, hey....

Forget all that's been said about the "Millerverse" sub-universe of Batman stories. The Dark Knight Returns was the first (okay, it came a while after one or two stories in the main title). It's clearly set in the future for A Batman.

But which Batman?

Most people have assumed it was the future for the then-current Batman. But I noticed several little things in it that made me think it was set a mere 5-10 years in the future (from publication date, ie, the early 1990s), but was the future for the 1960s Adam West-era Batman. Okay, maybe not a 100% faithful version of West's Batman, but a future version of a more lighthearted (compared to the early 80s) Batman who was at the prime of his career in the 1960s, with some subsequent adventures mirroring later Batman adventures more closely (like Jason Todd being the second Robin).

I can't remember off the top of my head what it was that made me think that. But it fits more than being the definitive future of the present-day Batman.

Also, he refers to the Joker killing Jason Todd. TDKR pre-dates A Death in the Family. So was A Death in the Family, albeit unintentionally, rigged from the beginning by Batman's reminiscing in TDKR?

[jjreason]

Having no real concept of the Batman Timeline, I can only answer with a "huh". I'm guessing he didn't really consider too much "which" Batman he was using as the previous version of his own - I think you can pretty much bring any Bruce Wayne that survives until 55 or whatever up to a point where Dark Knight takes place.

Too Long Didn't Read? It's any Batman and every Batman. That's how Bruce's story ends, same as Return of the Jedi is the end of Star Wars and killing Arthas was the end of the WoW story, regardless of what came before or comes after. *stamps foot*

[anarky]

No.

The ending for Batman is Neil Gaiman's sublime "Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader?" Regardless of which Batman it is.

And, if you've read it, which I hope you have, you know it's also the beginning for every version of Batman.

[Rollo Tomathi]

I don't care which Batman he is, those tights just get me all a-tingle every time!

[jjreason]

No.

The ending for Batman is Neil Gaiman's sublime "Whatever Happened to the Caped Crusader?" Regardless of which Batman it is.

And, if you've read it, which I hope you have, you know it's also the beginning for every version of Batman.

You know Chux, I don't think I ever had read it. I'll have to look into it.

EDITED: Checked for the covers online, I might actually have those issues upstairs someplace. Weird the story didn't stick out in my mind, I'll have to dig that box out & see if I have them to read again. If not I'll get them straight away.

[anarky]

Definitely read it. It's downright sublime. I don't want to say anything about it because there'd be spoilers, but I think there's a thread her about it if you want to be spoiled.

[Rollo Tomassi]

I don't think a story that's intentionally trying so hard to be sublime should be counted as sublime. If he'd written a straightforward good story, and it ended up being heralded as sublime in posterity, then fine. But as it is, I think that story was written so he could wave his arms and say "look at me! I'm a clever writer!". And as such, is teetering on meh. Its still good, but not sublime.

[vynsane]

so are you saying it's subsublime?

[Rollo Tomassi]

Or maybe they cancel each other and its just lime.